Learner beliefs are an important individual difference in second language (L2) learning. Furthermore, an ongoing debate surrounds the role of grammar instruction and error correction in the L2 classroom. Therefore, this study investigated the beliefs of L2 learners regarding the controversial role of grammar instruction and error correction. A total of 754 L2 students at an American university completed a questionnaire consisting of 37 Likert-scale items and 4 openended prompts. The quantitative items were submitted to a factor analysis, which identified 6 underlying factors (efficacy of grammar, negative attitude toward error correction, priority of communication, importance of grammar, importance of grammatical accuracy, and negative attitude toward grammar instruction). These factors were then used to investigate differences in beliefs among learners studying different target languages. In addition, themes emerging from the qualitative data were identified. The results indicate that among learners studying English as a second language and those studying a foreign language, there were varied beliefs about grammar instruction and error correction.LEARNER BELIEFS HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED as an important individual difference variable in second language (L2) learning (Dörnyei, 2005;Kalaja & Barcelos, 2003). The importance of learner beliefs lies in the fact that they underlie learner behavior to a large extent (Horwitz, 1988). Grotjahn (1991) argues that learner beliefs are "highly individual, relatively stable, and relatively enduring" (p. 189) and that studying learner beliefs might help explain and predict behaviors

No abstract

This study analyzes the language learning narratives of 3 NNS foreign language teachers. It uses as a theoretical framework the L2 Motivational Self System (L2MSS) (Dörnyei, 2009) but adds the dimension of psychological reactance (Brehm, 1966). Our findings indicate that the L2MSS underestimates the relationship between ‘I' and ‘other,' a distinction that is paramount in Self‐Discrepancy Theory (Higgins, 1987). Specifically, the ‘I' dimension is strongly articulated in the ideal L2 self, whereas the ‘other' dimension is not. The inverse is true for the ought‐to L2 self in which the ‘other' dimension is emphasized. These omissions underemphasize the importance of the interaction between the self and the context in forming language learning motivation. In addition, the findings indicate that the L2MSS framework needs further development in order to account for learners in a variety of settings, as opposed to primarily an English as a Foreign Language (EFL) environment. Consistent with recent claims about the types of contributions that language learning biographies/narratives can make to SLA research (Pavlenko, 2007), this study offers additional insights into how individual differences interact with contextual variables in language learning.

With the L2 Motivational Self System (L2MSS) as a framework, this study is an investigation of the relationships among motivation, language choice, and multilingualism using data from 195 undergraduate learners of languages other than English (LOTEs) in the context of the United States. Motivation is operationalized by the three aspects of self (ideal, ought-to, and anti-ought-to). Multilingualism is operationalized in two ways: previous language experience and Perceived Positive Language Interaction (PPLI), the latter being an emic perspective of multilingualism for which learners can only be considered to be multilingual if they can articulate positive interactions between foreign languages studied. A variety of analyses were used to answer questions relating to motivational group differences and language choice, the potential predictive nature of motivation in terms of language choice, group differences of motivational profiles between bi-and multilingual students for both operationalizations of multilingualism, and the person-specific versus language-specific nature of the three aspects of self. As most of the work on language learning motivation has been done with English language learners (ELLs), the results of this study with these LOTE learners are contextualized in terms of previous results with ELLs.

No abstract