Ellis Ch 3 Psychological factors and SLA.pptx

Chapter 3:
Psychological Factors
and second language
acquisition
Ellis, R. (2015). Understanding Second
Language Acquisition (2nd Edition). Oxford.
UK

Key psychological factors
• learners may vary in the extent to which they experience language
anxiety. These psychological factors have been of interest to
researchers because they help to explain differences in individual
learners’ rate and success in learning a second language.
• Table 3.1 presents a brief description of the main factors that have been
investigated in SLA in terms of these three dimensions. However, I will
make no attempt to survey the research on all these factors but instead
focus on three key factors generally considered to be representative of
the three dimensions—language aptitude, motivation, and language
anxiety. This is justified as the research has shown that these are the
factors that impact most strongly on L2 learning. There is a scarcity of
research that has investigated the direct influence of the other factors
on the processes involved in language learning.
• See table 3.1
see also ch 3: Individual
differences in L2 learning in
Lightbown & Spada)

Table 3.1 Key individual difference factors in language learning

Language aptitude
• Language aptitude is traditionally viewed as a ‘special talent’ for language
learning.
• However, it is perhaps better defined as a conglomerate (collaboration) of
abilities that interact dynamically with the situation in which learning takes
place (Kormos 2013).
• Learners who possess these abilities, who are able to use them appropriately
in the learning situations they find themselves, and who are motivated to do
so are likely to achieve a high level of proficiency in a second language.
• We will now examine what these abilities are, starting with the early work by
Carroll (1965) and then taking a closer look at more recent models of
language aptitude.

Language aptitude
• Carroll’s model of language aptitude has led to a number of questions being raised.
• It was used to characterize learners as having ‘high’ or ‘low’ language aptitude, but
researchers have increasingly recognized the need to differentiate learners according to
the specific cognitive abilities they possessed.
• Carroll’s claim that language aptitude was largely stable and not amenable to training was
also challenged.
• It was questioned whether language aptitude played any role in how children learned a
second language.
• Finally—and most importantly perhaps—researchers began to question whether the four
abilities that the MLAT measured constituted a valid conceptualization of language
aptitude.
• I will turn now to a consideration of these various issues.

Differentiating types of learners
• Skehan (1986) conducted a study of learners studying Arabic in the
Army School of Languages in Britain. His analysis of the results of
aptitude tests indicated that some of the learners demonstrated
strength in grammatical sensitivity whereas others were strong in
memory and ‘chunk-learning’ (i.e. learning formulaic sequences).
• He proposed that learners could be distinguished in terms of whether
they were analytic or memory oriented and showed that both types
were successful.

Stable or trainable?
• Nation and McLaughlin (1986) provided evidence that expert learners
(i.e. learners with experience of learning several L2s) were superior to
novice learners (i.e. learners with experience of learning just one
language) in implicit learning.
• They suggested that this was because expert learners made more
efficient use of learning strategies, but it is also possible that their
superiority was due to their enhanced language aptitude.

Language aptitude and age
• Learners’ age has an impact on the rate, ultimate attainment, and
(possibly) the process of L2 acquisition and that this may reflect the
different approaches to learning employed by young as opposed to
adolescent/adult learners; older learners, for example, may make use
of their greater analytical skills.
• This suggests that the role of language aptitude varies according to the
age of the learner.

• They reported a positive correlation between memory ability and L2
proficiency in the early starters, but between language analytical ability
and proficiency in the learners who began in grade seven. However,
Harley and Hart pointed out that this result could also be explained by
the kind of instructional approach that the two groups had experienced.
That is, the instruction for the early-starters emphasized memory-
related activities whereas the instruction received by the late-starters
was more demanding of analytical skills.

Aptitude and type of learning
• Implicit vs. explicit learning
• Language aptitude correlated with the test scores of both groups of
learners for both grammatical structures and there was no difference
between the two groups. In other words, language aptitude proved to
be an explanatory factor irrespective of the type of instruction.
• Overall, no clear conclusion can be reached about the role of language
aptitude in different types of learning. It would seem likely, however,
that some abilities (for example, phonological ability and memory) are
important in both implicit and explicit learning.

Reconceptualizing language aptitude
• The developments that we will now consider were of two main kinds.
• The first involved an attempt to relate language aptitude to concepts as
noticing, noticing-the-gap, and pushed output (see Chapter 1). In other
words, language aptitude was now examined in relation to the process of
acquisition and not just to its product.
• The second approach entailed attempts to develop new ways of measuring
aptitude, in particular, by incorporating working memory into the model.
• working memory Working memory is where the key processes of
perception, attention, and rehearsal take place. It is believed to play a
central role in L2 acquisition and provides a link with long-term memory.
There are different models of working memory but the model that figures
most strongly in SLA research is the limited capacity model.

Reconceptualizing language aptitude
• It is not difficult to see why learners’ working memory capacity is so
important for language learning. Learners with a larger capacity will be
able to store more linguistic data, rehearse it more fully, and make links
with information stored in long-term memory.
• Working memory is hypothesized to be especially important in
implicit learning when learners are primarily focused on meaning

Summing up
• 1. Early work in language aptitude centred around the development of tests—such
as Carroll and Sapon’s (1959) Modern language Aptitude Test (MLAT)—that
were used to predict how easily learners would learn a second language.
• 2. The MLAT is a robust and useful instrument and continues to be used in
research today. It has been shown to predict success in learning in both naturalistic
and instructed contexts.
• 3. As language aptitude is comprised of a number of distinct abilities, it is possible
that learners differ in the abilities they are strong in. Skehan (1986) proposed a
distinction between analytic-oriented and memory-oriented learners, both of
whom can achieve success.
• 4. Language aptitude was initially seen as a stable, trait-like construct, but this
view was subsequently challenged. There is evidence to suggest that abilities
change as a result of learning experience and therefore may be trainable.

Summing up
• 5. There is a relationship between language aptitude and age. A high level of language analytical
ability may be required to enable adult learners to achieve high levels of L2proficiency (DeKeyser
2000). This ability, however, appears to be of less importance for child learners.
• 6. The abilities required for implicit and explicit learning may also differ. For example,
phonological coding ability is more important for implicit learning while language analytical
ability is more important for explicit learning.
• 7. The original conceptualization of language aptitude has changed. New models (Skehan 2002;
Robinson 2002) have been developed that link specific abilities to stages in the process of L2
acquisition and to the requirements of different instructional tasks. Central to these new models is
working memory, which is now seen as a key component of language aptitude.

Why are aptitude tests important
• Are aptitude tests effective?
• Aptitude Tests as a Predictor of Performance
Research has shown that an individual's cognitive aptitude can be one
of the most accurate predictors of their success at a job. It can work
twice as well as an interview, three times as well as their past
experience, and four times better than their education.

Language aptitude test sample
• The MLAT is comprised of five parts, each of which measures specific skills related
to foreign language learning. The first part, Number Learning, requires examinees to
learn a set of numbers through aural input and then discriminate different
combinations of those numbers. The second part, Phonetic Script, asks examinees to
learn a set of correspondences between speech sounds and phonetic symbols. In the
third part, Spelling Clues, examinees must read words that are spelled as they are
pronounced, rather than according to standard spelling conventions. They must then
select from a list of words the one whose meaning is closest to the “disguised” word.
The fourth part, Words in Sentences, measures examinees’ awareness of grammatical
structure. The examinees are given a key word in a sentence and are then asked to
read a second sentence (or series of sentences) and select another word that functions
in the same way as the key word. Finally, in the Paired Associates part, examinees
must quickly learn a set of vocabulary words from another language and memorize
their English meanings.

Motivation
• Like language aptitude, motivation is a complex construct. It involves:
• 1. The reasons a learner has for needing or wanting to learn an L2 (i.e. motivational
orientation).
• 2. The effort a learner makes to learn the L2, the learner’s persistence with the
learning task, and the impact immediate context has on these (i.e. behavioural
motivation).
• 3. The effect that the learner’s evaluation of his/her progress has on subsequent
learning behaviour (i.e. attributional motivation).
• Following Dörnyei (2005), I will adopt a historical approach by outlining how the
study of motivation has evolved over the last 50 or so years. I will then focus on a
recent theory of motivation and the research it has generated.

The social-psychological period (1959–
1990)
• The starting point was the recognition that learners’ motivation depended on
their attitudes towards the other community and to the target language, and
that these were socially determined. community and to the target language,
and that these were socially determined.
• Gardner and Lambert (1972) distinguished two broad orientations: an
integrative orientation entails a desire to identify with the target-language
culture and its speakers; an instrumental orientation arises when learners
wish to learn a second language for functional purposes (for example, to
pass an examination or obtain a job).
• Gardner’s (1985) Socio-educational Model also emphasized the importance
of the social and cultural milieu in which learning took place. This determined
the cultural beliefs learners held, which in turn influenced their orientation and
attitudes to the learning situation.

1. The social-psychological period
(1959–1990)
• These made use of the instrument that Gardner developed to measure
motivation—the Attitude Motivation Test Battery (AMTB) (1985), which
included questions relating to motivational orientation, attitudes, and
effort.
• Self-confidence constituted a social psychological variable as it
originated in the quality and quantity of the contact between members
of the target and L2 communities. Clement argued that ‘frequency of
contact and the concomitant self-confidence might be more important
in determining second language proficiency than socio-contextual or
affective factors’ (p. 287).

2. The cognitive-situated period
• In this period, responding to criticisms levelled at the social-psychological
approach, researchers turned to mainstream theories of motivation in
cognitive psychology. In so doing, they broadened the scope of enquiry
into the motivation for second language learning by examining factors that
aroused intrinsic interest in learners and learners’ perceptions of the reasons
for their success or failure.
• Self-determination Theory
• Self-determination Theory (Deci and Ryan 1985) was built around the
common-sense notion that people are motivated by both external factors
such as rewards, grades, or the opinions of others and by internal ones such
as personal interests, curiosity, or experiencing an activity as fun.

2. The cognitive-situated period
• Self-determination Theory
• They defined extrinsically motivated behaviours as ‘those actions
carried out to achieve some instrumental end’
• intrinsic motivation could be derived from (1) knowledge (i.e. the
motivation derived from exploring new ideas and knowledge), (2)
accomplishment (i.e. the pleasant sensations aroused by trying to
achieve a task or goal), and (3) stimulation (i.e. the fun and excitement
generated by actually performing a task).

Attribution Theory
• Attribution Theory (Weiner 1992) views motivation as deriving from the
explanations that learners give for their progress in learning a second language. As
Dörnyei (2005) put it ‘the subjective reasons to which we attribute our past successes
and failures considerably shape our motivational disposition underlying future action’
(p. 79). There are three main types of attributions. First, they can be internal (i.e.
learners explain their performance in terms of their own ability or lack of it) or external
(i.e. learners place the blame for learning problems on external factors). Second,
learners can perceive the outcome of their learning efforts as stable or unstable. In the
case of the former, learners may be less inclined to make any further effort as they
believe it will make no difference, but in the case of the latter, they may try harder. The
third set of attributions concerns whether the factors influencing success or failure are
seen as controllable or uncontrollable. Learners will be more motivated to improve
if they perceive the cause of their difficulties lies within themselves rather than in
other people (for example, a poor teacher).

The process-oriented period
The Process Model of L2 Motivation
• The Process Model of L2 Motivation (Dörnyei and Otto 1998) constitutes the fullest
attempt to represent the complex, dynamic nature of motivation. It proposes three
phases:
• 1. Pre-actional phase. This involves goal-setting and the formation of an action plan.
Motivational influences in this stage include ‘attitudes towards the L2 and its speakers’, as
in Gardner’s model, but also a range of other factors (for example, ‘expectancy of
success’ and ‘perceived coping potential’). Dörnyei and Otto refer to this stage as ‘choice
motivation’.
• 2. Actional stage. This is when learners begin to implement their action plan. It
involves ‘executive motivation’.
• 3. Post-actional phase. This is when the learner evaluates the outcome of the actions
undertaken and forms causal attributions about the reasons for the success or failure of
the action plan.
• The model is useful, however, because it provides a basis for identifying specific
strategies that teachers can employ to help motivate learners (see Dörnyei 2001).

Group dynamics and motivation
• The second major development during this period centred on the
powerful motivating force of group dynamics. As Dörnyei and Murphey
(2003) noted, ‘groups have been found to have a ‘life of their own’—
that is, individuals in groups behave differently from the way they do
outside the group’ (p. 3). In other words, while motivation is a construct
that relates to the individual learner, it will be influenced by the other
members of the group that the learner is part of.

Self-regulation and motivation
• the learners’ motivation was a prerequisite for effective use of
regulatory strategies, which in turn influence their level of autonomy.
• Motivation as an act of communication
• Finally, motivation can be seen as constructed in and through
interaction. As McNamara (1973) noted long ago, ‘the really important
part of motivation lies in the act of communication itself’ (p. 252). This
perspective affords the most dynamic view of motivation.

Summing up
• Over the years, thinking about motivation has evolved and complexified. The
following is a summary of the main dimensions of motivation that have been
identified:
• 1. The Socio-educational Model emphasized the role of integrativeness in L2
achievement. In some contexts, such as bilingual Canada, learners who have a
desire to identify with the target-language culture and its speakers achieve more than
those who lack this desire.
• 2. Learners’ self-confidence also plays a role in second language learning.
• 3. Situation-specific factors are influential in facilitating learners’ intrinsic motivation,
which is likely to be more powerful than extrinsic motivation in promoting learning.
• 4. Learners form attributions about their success and failure and their subsequent
motivation will depend on these attributions.

Summing up
• 5. Motivation should ultimately be seen as a ‘process’ rather than a ‘state’. Dörnyei and Otto proposed a model of
motivation-as-process by distinguishing the factors involved in choice, executive, and retrospective motivation.
• 6. Motivated learners are self-regulated (i.e. they plan, monitor, and evaluate their attempts to learn).
• 7. A learner’s motivation is influenced by other learners; the dynamics of a classroom or of a learning group affect
the extent to which individual learners are motivated, both overall and when performing specific tasks.
• 8. In part at least, motivation is an interactional phenomenon as it is generated and maintained in and through the
social interactions a learner participates in.
• 9. Dörnyei’s L2 Motivational Self System constitutes an attempt to construct a composite theory of L2 motivation by
distinguishing three components—the Ideal L2 Self, the Ought-to Self, and the L2 Learning Experience.

3.Language anxiety
• I turn now to consider briefly one of the key affective factors that has
been shown to impact on L2 learning. Language anxiety is the anxiety
that results from learners’ emotional responses to the learning
conditions they experience in a specific situation. It differs from, but is
related to, trait anxiety (i.e. the learner’s overall tendency to be anxious
as a result of their personality). It has been investigated primarily in
classroom learners by means of both quantitative and qualitative
research methods.

3.Language anxiety
• Much of the research has focused on the sources of language anxiety. Bailey (1983)
analysed the diaries of 11 learners and found that they tended to become anxious
when they compared themselves with other learners in the class and found
themselves less proficient.
• Other sources of anxiety include being asked to communicate spontaneously in the
second language, fear of negative evaluation, and tests. Horwitz, Horwitz, and Cope
(1986) developed a questionnaire that has been widely used by researchers—the
Foreign Language Classroom Anxiety Scale—based on these three major sources.
• Learners, however, differ in what they find anxiety-provoking. Horwitz (2001)
noted that ‘in almost all cases, any task that was judged “comfortable” by some
learners was also judged “stressful” by others’ (p. 118).
• As with motivation, anxiety can be both the result as well as the cause of poor
achievement.

Linguistic Coding Difference Hypothesis
• Sparks, Ganschow, and Javorsky’s (2000) Linguistic Coding Difference Hypothesis
claims that success in foreign language learning is primarily dependent on language
aptitude and that students’ anxiety about learning an L2 is a consequence of the learning
difficulties they experience because of deficits in their aptitude.
• Sheen (2008) showed that anxiety can affect the learners’ ability to process input. She
found that the low-anxiety learners were much more likely to repair their errors following
recasts and consequently learn from them.
• High anxiety, then, can impede learning because it interferes with the learners’ ability to
process input in their working memory.
• Anxiety can be seen as an aspect of motivation as it impacts negatively on learners’
motivation to learn. It can also be seen as a personality variable. However, it would be a
mistake to see low anxiety as a necessary condition for successful second language
learning. In some cases, anxiety can be facilitative, driving learners to make more effort.

4. Learning strategies
• Oxford (1989) defined learning strategies as ‘behaviors or actions which learners
use to make language learning more successful, self-directed and enjoyable’ (p.
235). There are, however considerable problems in deciding exactly what constitutes a
‘learning strategy’.
• Researchers differ in whether they should be restricted to strategies directed at attempts
to learn or should also include communication strategies (i.e. strategies such as
‘requesting clarification’ used to resolve a communication problem).
• They also differ in whether they see them as involving conscious application on the
part of the learner or as performed automatically without consciousness. One
possibility—compatible with Skill-learning Theory (see Chapter 1)—is that they start
out as conscious but subsequently, as a result of continuous use, become automatic and
unconscious.

Typologies of learning strategies
• It distinguishes three basic categories of strategies:
• 1. Metacognitive strategies, for example ‘selective attention’ (deciding in
advance to attend to specific aspects of language input).
• 2. Cognitive strategies, for example ‘inferencing’ (using available
information to guess meanings of new items, predict outcomes, or fill in
missing information).
• 3. Social/affective strategies, for example ‘question for clarification’ (asking
a teacher or another native speaker for repetition, paraphrasing, explanation).

Correlational studies
• Much of the learning-strategy research has used questionnaires (for example,
Oxford’s, 1990, Strategy Inventory for Language Learning). These ask learners to
self-report which specific strategies they use or how frequently they use them.
Quantitative scores derived from these questionnaires are then correlated with
measures of L achievement/proficiency.
• Studies that have employed such an approach (for example, Wharton 2000) generally
report that higher-proficiency learners use more strategies than lower proficiency
learners.
• Such studies are inherently problematic, however, as it is impossible to tell whether it
is strategy use that causes learning or whether the ability to use particular strategies is
dependent on proficiency. For example, more advanced learners have been found to
make greater use of metacognitive strategies (Macaro 2006), but this might simply
be because their greater language proficiency gives them access to these strategies

Age and psychological factors
• It is interesting to consider whether the impact of the psychological factors we
have considered in this chapter depends on the age of the learners. In the case
of language aptitude, there is clear evidence that it does. Whereas short-
term phonological memory may be of special importance for young learners,
language analytical ability (lexis and collocations, and morphology and
syntax) appears to be more important for older learners. Granena and Long
(2012) showed that language aptitude diminishes the negative effects that
increasing age has on the acquisition of lexical knowledge. (Knowledge of
common word sequences.

Age and psychological factors
• Age and motivation are also related. Kormos and Csizér (2008) investigated Hungarian school pupils, university
students, and adult language learners and found that there were differences in what motivated these three groups. The
school learners were primarily motivated by interest in English-language cultural products (films, TV programs,
magazines, pop music) whereas the two older groups were more influenced by their attitudes to English in the
globalized world. (Since secondary school students have limited opportunities to use English outside
of the classroom and that most course books still focus on L2 native speakers and their cultures,
they have positive attitudes about native speakers and the global English user community).
• Relationships have also been found between age and language anxiety, with older learners tending to be more
anxious than younger learners (for example Onwuegbuzie, Bailey, and Daley 1999).
• Not surprisingly, given their mediating role, the learning strategies that learners prefer vary with age. Age
differences in the speed of learning and ultimate attainment that we noted in the previous chapter may be—in part at
least—traceable to the part played by key psychological factors.

Conclusion
• It is important not to study psychological factors accumulatively and not to study them
separately, though. (to improve the learning & teaching processes)
• There is an interesting branch of early research into individual differences that I did not consider
in this chapter, but that can be seen as addressing the ‘whole’ learner. The ‘good language
learner’ studies (for example, Naiman, Fröhlich, Stern, and Todesco 1978) sought to identify
the characteristics of successful learners mainly in terms of the learning strategies that they
reported using. These indicated five major aspects of successful learners:
• (1) a concern for language form; (2) a concern for communication; (3) an active task
approach; (4) awareness of the learning process; and (5) flexible use of learning strategies.
• These studies, however, took little account of the role of language aptitude, motivation, or
language anxiety. A more complete picture of the efficacious learner could perhaps incorporate
the insights provided by research into these three areas.

Conclusion
The idea of the “whole”
• One way of viewing how the ‘parts’ make up the ‘whole’ might be to consider what
constitutes self-efficacy. The construct of the ‘ideal language self’ can also be seen
as a composite construct that involves more than just motivation. (it’s not motivation
only that drives the learner to do his best)
• Dörnyei (2010) argued that ‘the effective functioning of the ideal L2 self is
dependent on the operation of several underlying cognitive components, most
notably on the learners’ self-appraisal of their capabilities and evaluation of the
affordances of their personal circumstances in order to anchor their vision in a
sense of realistic expectations’ (pp. 257–8). In other words, there is a cognitive and
emotional dimension to this construct.
(a mixture of cognitive and personal capabilities)

Conclusion
• The challenge facing researchers who wish to investigate the ‘whole’ learner is to
determine how this can be undertaken. It is clearly much easier to investigate the effect
of specific factors such as language aptitude, motivation, and language anxiety as there
are instruments available to measure each. Dörnyei (2010) proposed applying
Dynamic Systems Theory ( it is concerned with outcome of the interaction of
processes at many levels and many systems)to the study of individual
differences. This involves investigating the interactive effect of different factors and
how this effect changes over time. Clearly, this is a challenging undertaking. Dynamic
Systems Theory is considered further in Chapter 5 and Chapter 9.
• Dynamic Systems Theory This theory views interlanguage as a complex adaptive
system involving complete interconnectedness; that is ‘all variables are interrelated
and therefore changes in one variable will have an impact on all other variables
that are part of the system’ (de Bot, Lowie, and Verspoor 2007: 8). The theory claims
that much of the variation evident in learner language is chaotic and acquisition is non-
linear.

Important Terms
• language aptitude It has been hypothesized that people possess a special ability for learning an
L2. Language aptitude is considered to be separate from the general ability to master academic
skills, often referred to as intelligence. It is one of the factors that characterize individual learner
differences. Various tests have been designed to measure language learning aptitude, for example,
the Modern Language Aptitude Test. (the potential that a person has for learning languages. It
aims at helping learners identify their preferences for learning; thinking about learning
styles, and then looking at how these can be developed; and developing learner autonomy
by teaching learners how to study effectively).
• Modern Language Aptitude Test This is a test developed by Carroll and Sapon (1959) that
measured the different abilities involved in language-learning aptitude including phonemic coding
ability, language analytical ability, and memory.
• Integrative motivation refers to a favorable attitude toward the target language community,
possibly a wish to integrate and adapt to a new target culture through use of the language (When
students want to learn a language to become part of a speech community (integrate) like
immigrants, it is apart from intrinsic motivation).

Important Terms
• explicit instruction Explicit instruction involves ‘some sort of rule being thought about during the
learning process’ (DeKeyser 1995). That is, learners are encouraged to develop metalinguistic
awareness of the rule. This can be achieved by means of deductive instruction or inductive
instruction. Explicit L2 knowledge is declarative knowledge—i.e. knowledge of rules—which
learners are able to report. Explicit L2 knowledge is closely linked to metalinguistic knowledge. It
contrasts with implicit knowledge.
• explicit learning Explicit learning is a conscious process that is also likely to be intentional. It
can be investigated by giving learners an explicit rule and asking them to apply it to data or by
inviting them to try to discover an explicit rule from data provided.
• implicit instruction Implicit instruction is directed at enabling learners to learn an L2 incidentally by
attracting their attention to linguistic forms while they are primarily focused on meaning. There is no
direct explanation of the target feature and in this respect it contrasts with explicit
instruction.

Important Terms
• Linguistic Coding Difference Hypothesis This claims that native
language skills play an important role in the success or failure of L2
learning. Learners who have limitations in their native language are
predicted to encounter difficulties in learning an L2. (The hypothesis posits
that poor or strong performance in foreign language learning may result
not. from affective variables, but rather, from native language).
• Sparks, Ganschow, and Javorsky’s (2000) Linguistic Coding Difference
Hypothesis claims that success in foreign language learning is primarily
dependent on language aptitude and that students’ anxiety about learning
an L2 is a consequence of the learning difficulties they experience because
of deficits in their aptitude.

Important Terms
• metacognitive strategy Many L2 learners are able to think consciously about how they learn.
Metacognitive strategies involve planning learning, monitoring the process of learning, and
evaluating how successful a particular strategy is. (thinking consciously about their learning
processes)
• strategy instruction This involves attempts to teach learners how to make use of specific
communication strategies or learning strategies. Strategy instruction studies measure the effect that
such instruction has on language learning. (using specific strategies in acquiring a certain skill, IELTS)
• good language learner Researchers have investigated the individual learner factors that contribute to
L2 learning by investigating what expert, successful L2 learners do in order to learn an L2. These studies
are known as the ‘good language learner studies’. (focusing on the whole theory)
• 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. (Wikipedia)

Lightbown & Spada: How Languages are learnt. Chapter 3:
Individual differences in L2 language learning

Ellis Ch 3 Psychological factors and SLA.pptx

More Related Content

What's hot

Similar to Ellis Ch 3 Psychological factors and SLA.pptx

More from Noorhussein32

Recently uploaded

Ellis Ch 3 Psychological factors and SLA.pptx