Learners FactorsWord格式文档下载.docx

Learners FactorsWord格式文档下载.docx

《Learners FactorsWord格式文档下载.docx》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《Learners FactorsWord格式文档下载.docx（26页珍藏版）》请在冰豆网上搜索。

*Affectivevariables

*Personalityvariables

*Learningstyle

*Age

Thepreviousunitshaveconcentratedonthedescriptionoftheuniversalaspectsofhumanlearningandsoughtoexplainhowlearnersperceive,filter,storeandrecallinformationinL2acquisition.However,theydonotaccountforindividuallearnervariables,whichinfluencelearningoutcomes.Mostofushavehadthecommonexperiencethatagroupoflearnershadthesameteacherandfollowedthesametextbook,butverydifferentlevelsofsuccesswerereachedbyindividualsintheclassattheendofthetrainingprogram.Whatexactlyarethevariablesthatmakethedifference?

Inthepast20or30years,appliedlinguistshavegivenagreatdealofattentiontotryingtoidentifythemandhaveshownthatahostoflearnercharacteristicsareresponsiblefor,notall,butatleastpartofone’ssuccessorfailureinlearning.

Thevariablesthatcontributetoindividualdifferencesareusuallydividedintothreebroadcategories.Intelligenceandaptitudearecalledcognitivevariable,meaningthattheyrelatetothementalmakeupoftheperson.Motivationandattitudesarecalledaffectivevariables,meaningthattheyarerelatedtofeelings.Extroversionorintroversionisthetypicalexampleofpersonalityvariables.ThisunitmakesanattempttodiscussthosevariableswhichareparticulartoL2learning.Cognitivevariationsinlearningstylesthatdifferacrossindividuals,andlearningstrategiesusedbyindividualstodealwithparticularproblemsinparticularcontextshavealsoattractedalotofattentioninL2learningresearchandmadeconsiderableadvancesinrecentyears.Theresultsoftheresearcharediscussedseparatelyinthisunit.

Learners’cognitivevariations,affectivestatesandpersonalcharacteristicsarelikelytohaveadirecteffectonL2learning,buttheythemselvesmaybeinfluencedbysomemoregeneralfactorsrelatingtolearners’abilityanddesiretolearnasecondlanguage.AgeisthevariablethathasbeenmostfrequentlyconsideredindiscussionsofindividualdifferencesinL2learning.Thisisduetotheeasewithwhichitcanbemeasuredreliablyandprecisely,andduetothecommonlyheldbeliefthatchildrenarebetterlanguagelearnersthanadults.AgeisanimportantissuefortheorybuildinginL2learningresearch,foreducationalpolicy-makingandforlanguagepedagogy.Thisunitistohighlightthekeyelementsoftheageissuebyexaminingtheeffectsofage,andthehypothesesandexplanationsabouttheseeffects.

Cognitivevariables

Intelligence

Intheearly20thcentury,intelligencewasconsideredanimportantfactorforforeignlanguagelearning.Itwasalsobelievedthatforeignlanguagelearningactuallyhelpedtodevelopintelligence,andeventodaysomepeopleinsistthatlearningLatinhelpsbuildintellectualpowersevenifitmaynotbeausefullanguagetoknow.

Traditionally,intelligenceisdefinedandmeasuredintermsoflinguisticandlogical-mathematicalabilities.ItwasproposedinAusubel’smeaningfullearningmodel（1968）thathighintelligencewouldnodoubtimplyaveryefficientprocessofstoringitemsthatareparticularlyusefulinbuildingconceptualhierarchiesandsystematicallypruningthosethatarenotuseful.In1983,H.Gardnergaveamorecomprehensivepictureofintelligenceandmaintainedthatthedefinitionlfintelligenceshouldbroadlyincludesevendifferentaspects:

linguisticabilities;

logical-mathematicalabilities;

spatialintelligence（theabilitytofindone’swayaroundanenvironment,toformmentalimagesofrealityandtotransformthemreadily）;

musicalintelligence（theabilitytoperceiveandcreatepitchandrhythmicpatterns）;

bodily-kinestheticintelligence（finemotormovement,athleticprowess）;

interpersonalintelligence（theabilitytounderstandothers,howtheyfeel,whatmotivatesthem,howtheyinteractwithoneanother）;

andintrapersonalintelligence（theabilitytoseeoneself,todevelopasenseofself-identity）.Fromthebroaddefinitionofintelligence,wecaneasilydiscernthatintelligencereferstotheunderlyingabilitytolearnandtousevariousacademicskills.Thisgeneralintelligenceisusuallyabbreviatedto‘g’.

Towhatextent,however,doesthe‘g’factorinfluenceL2learning?

Gardner’snotionofintelligenceisofcrucialimportancetosecondlanguagesuccess.Musicalintelligencecouldexplaintherelativeeasethatsomelearnershaveinperceivingandproducingtheintonationpatternsofalanguage.Bodily-kinestheticmodesareconnectedwiththelearningofthephonologyofalanguage.Interpersonalintelligenceisofimportanceinthecommunicativeprocess.Intrapersonalfactorssuchasmotivation,attitudeandpersonalitymayhavedefiniteimpactonsecondlanguagelearning.

DuringtheprocessofL1acquisition,intelligenceisnotfoundasadecisivefactor,exceptformentallyretardedchildren.Mostchildrenareabletogetcompletegrammarknowledge.Fromthispoint,wecouldsaythatintelligenceisalsonotadecisivefactorinforeignlanguageacquisition.However,someresearcherssuggestthatintelligencetestscanpredictsuccessinL2learningandothersbelievethatthereissomeseparate,specialmentalconstructthatdeterminesouraptitudeforlanguagelearning.

In1979,ComminsofferedamoresophisticatedexplanationoftheconnectionbetweenintelligenceandL2proficiency.Hedistinguishestwokindsoflanguageabilitythatallnativespeakersofalanguagemayhave.ThefirstiscalledCognitive/AcademicLanguageProficiency（CALP）andthesecondistermedBasicInterpersonalCommunicationSkill（BICS）.CALPinvolvesrecognizingthelinguisticformsofthelanguageandhowtheyrelatetooneanotherinlongersequencesofspokenorwrittentext.LevelsofCALParejudgedbythenativespeakers’linguisticknowledgeofthelanguageandtheirabilitytousethisknowledgepreciselyandflexibly.EvidenceofsuchCALPabilitycanbeprovidedbythecompetenceoneshowsindoinglanguagetestsandexercises,andbytheproficiencywithwhichindividualsareabletoproducelongerwrittenassignmentsordissertations.Proficiencyatthistypeoflanguageuseisaffectedbyaperson’s‘g’,andnativespeakershavethisabilitytodifferentextentsintheirL1.BICSareskillswhichdetermineoralfluencyandtheabilitytouselanguageappropriatelytocommunicate.Theyare‘basic’inthesensethattheyaredevelopednaturally.Allnormalnativespeakershavethisabilityanditisunaffectedbyanindividual’s‘g’.AccordingtoCummins,thesetwokindsofabilitiesareinterdependentandtakeeffectinbothnativelanguageandforeignlanguagelearning.Differentmeasuresoflanguageproficiencyarelikelytousebothabilitiesinvaryingproportions.

Cummins’distinctionbetweenCALPandBICSexplainsanumberofresearchfindings.Forinstance,Genesee’experiment（1976）foundthatintelligencewasstronglyrelatedtothedevelopmentofacademicL2Frenchlanguageskills（reading,grammarandvocabulary）,butnotrelatedtooralproficiency.ItseemsthattestsofgeneralintelligencemaybeabletopredicteventualL2proficiencyinCALP-likeareasoflanguage,butnotinthoserequiringBICSability.In1969,ChastaincomparedIQscoreswiththeachievementresultsofstudentslearningaforeignlanguagebytwodifferentmethods,audiolingualismandcognitivecode.Chastainreportedasignificantcorrelationwhenstudentsweretaughtbythecognitivecodemethodwhichemphasizeddeductivereasoningskills,butnonewhenstudentsweretaughtbytheaudio-lingualmethodthatemphasizedhabitformation.

Itisdifficultforustoknowhowmuchintelligenceinfluencesforeignlanguagelearning,becausegivinganaccuratedefinitionisnotaneasyjob.IntelligencemaybeapowerfulpredictorofsuccessintheL2classroom,whenthisconsistsofformalteachingmethods,butmuchlessinnaturalisticL2acquisition,whenL2knowledgeisdevelopedthroughlearninghowtocommunicateinthetargetlanguage.

Aptitude

Aptitudereferstothespecialabilityinvolvedinlanguagelearning.Languageaptitudeisthoughttobeacombinationofvariousabilitiesinlanguagelearning.ThetermwasoriginallycreatedbyJohnCarroll,apsychologistwhodevelopedatestcalledTheLanguageAptitudeTesttopredictperformanceofstudentsinforeignlanguagelearning.CarrollidentifiedfourindependentabilitiesconstitutingL2learningtalent:

（1）Phoneticcodingability—theabilitytoidentifydistinctsounds,toformassociationsbetweensoundsandthesymbolsthatrepresentthemandtoretaintheseassociations.Thisabilityisseenasrelatedtotheabilitytospellandtohandlesound—symbolrelationships.

（2）Grammaticalsensitivity—theabilitytorecognizethegrammaticalfunctionofwordsinsentencecontexts.

（3）Inductivelanguagelearningability—theabilitytoidentifypatternsofcorrespondenceandrelationsbetweenformandmeaning.

（4）Rotelearningabilitythe–theabilitytoformandrememberassociationsbetweenstimuli.Thisabilityishypothesizedtobeinvolvedinvocabularylearning.

TwoofthebestknowntestsaretheModernLanguageAptitudeTest（MLATforshort）andtheLanguageAptitudeBattery（LABforshort）.

TheMLATconsistsoffivesubtests:

Numberlearning;

Phoneticscript;

Spellingclues;

WordsinsentencesandPairedassociates.Phoneticcodingabilityischieflymeasuredbythe“phoneticscript”subtest,whichtestsbothsound—symbolassociationandauditorydiscrimination,andgrammaticalsensitivityistestedbythe“wordsinsentences”subtest,whichteststheabilitytorecognizethefunctionofwordsinthesentence.

P.Pimsleur（1966）