Students' Developing Conceptions of Themselves as Language Learners

Author(s): Marion Williams and Robert Burden

Source: The Modern Language Journal, Vol. 83, No. 2 (Summer, 1999), pp. 193-201
Published by: Wiley on behalf of the National Federation of Modern Language Teachers
Associations
Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/330335
Accessed: 29-11-2019 10:14 UTC

REFERENCES
Linked references are available on JSTOR for this article:
https://www.jstor.org/stable/330335?seq=1&cid=pdf-reference#references_tab_contents
You may need to log in to JSTOR to access the linked references.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms

National Federation of Modern Language Teachers Associations, Wiley are collaborating

with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Modern Language Journal

This content downloaded from 93.142.161.48 on Fri, 29 Nov 2019 10:14:54 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Students' Developing Conceptions of
Themselves as Language Learners
MARION WILLIAMS ROBERT BURDEN
School of Education School of Education
University of Exeter University of Exeter
Heavitree Road Heavitree Road

Exeter, EX1 2LU Exeter, EX1 2LU

Devon, U.K Devon, U.K.
Email: M.D. Williams@exeter.ac.uk Email: R.L.Burden @exeter ac. uk

This article describes a small-scale study into learners' attributions for success and failure in
learning French. The study investigated the way in which learners conceptualise the notion of
doing well, together with their perceived reasons for their successes and failures. Interviews
were conducted with students from 10 to 15 years of age who were learning French in the
Southwest of England. The results indicated that most of these learners tended to judge their
success by external factors such as teacher approval, marks, or grades, and that the range of
attributions increased with age. Many of the attributions mentioned, however, were superficial
in nature. It appears that the teacher plays a significant role in the development of students'
attributions. Implications are drawn with regard to language teaching and to the nature of the
learning environment.

THE SUCCESS WITH WHICH LEARNERS
develop their skills and competencies
a foreign language depends on an array
acting factors (Williams & Burden,process
the field of language learning and teaching one
set of factors that has received relatively little at- McCormick, 1994; Wertsch, 1988). Because lan-
tention is the reasons that learners construct for
their successes and failures in learning a new
language. Two major psychological perspectives
that shed light on this matter are constructivism
and attribution theory.
A constructivist perspective on learning sug-
gests that, far from representing a transmission of (epistemology) and, ultimately, on a particular
knowledge of what is known into the minds of
passively receptive learners, the process of learn- ing is based on the view that knowledge is inter-
ing is one of active construction of meaning by
each individual learner (Pope & Keen, 1981;
Sutherland, 1992; Thomas & Harri-Augstein,
1985). Radical constructivists see this as essen-
tially an isolated process that occurs when indi-
viduals interact with their environments (von
Glasersfeld, 1995). Social constructivists, how-
The Modern Language Journal, 83, ii, (1999)
0026-7902/99/193-201 $1.50/0
?1999 The Modern Language Journal
ever, emphasize the importance of the social con-
inwithin
text learning
which individual constructions are
of inter-
formed; that is, learning is essentially a social
1997).that
Within
occurs within a social context
through interactions with others (Donato &
guage is essentially part of a social process and
develops through social interactions, this per-
spective would appear to have a great deal to
offer to language teachers.
Whatever view of learning one adopts will be
based upon a particular conception of knowledge
worldview. A constructivist perspective on learn-
nal and personal to the individual. In other
words, there is no such thing as absolute knowl-
edge. Different individuals will have different un-
derstandings and create their own meanings that
are personal to them.
Such an approach places learners' developing
conceptions of themselves at the center of the
learning process because these conceptions pro-
foundly influence the ways in which individuals
make sense of new stimuli and construct new
knowledge. How we see ourselves as learners af-

This content downloaded from 93.142.161.48 on Fri, 29 Nov 2019 10:14:54 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
194 The Modern Language Journal 83 (1999)

fects our approach to tackling new learning tasks 1985). In his early writings, Weiner claimed that
and our overall attitude to whatever it is we are there were four main causes to which people at-
expected to learn (Seifert, 1997). tributed outcomes in situations involving achieve-
The area of learners' conceptions of them- ment, namely ability, effort, task difficulty, and luck
selves has been investigated in a number of differ-
(Weiner, Russell, & Lerman, 1979). A great deal
ent ways. Important aspects of the way in which of subsequent research has focused exclusively
individuals make sense of their learning are no- on those four areas, even though Weiner's
tions such as (a) self-concept, which is concerned more recent writings have acknowledged the
with individuals' overall view of who they are unnecessary limitations imposed by their un-
(Wylie, 1979); (b) self-efficacy, which reflects critical acceptance (Weiner, 1983, 1986). (See Ta-
learners' views of their competence in a particu- ble 1)
lar area (Bandura, 1977, 1997); and (c) locus of A number of studies have shown that there are
control, which relates to whether individuals see more than four possible perceived causes of suc-
the events that happen in their lives as lying cess and failure. Roberts and Pascuzzi (1979), for
within their control or outside of it (Wang, 1983). instance, claim to have found that Weiner's four
However, much of the research in this area has original causes were cited by only 45% of their
tended to have its roots in a traditional, positivist
sample of sportspersons, whereas Little (1985)
paradigm that relates personal attributes to nu-identified 18 different causes invoked by children
merical scores on self-concept or locus of controlto explain academic outcomes. One important
questionnaires (Findley & Cooper, 1983; Hans- aspect of such findings that appears to have been
ford & Hattie, 1982). Comparatively little work underresearched is the possibility that attribu-
has been carried out from a truly constructivist tions are differentially affected by specific areas
perspective that begins with the actual thoughts of achievement. It cannot necessarily be assumed,
and feelings of the participants. for example, that common attributions for suc-
A promising alternative approach to this area is cess and failure in sport (where much of the
provided by attribution theory, which is directly research has been carried out) will be the same
concerned with the ways in which individuals as attributions for success and failure in learning
make personal sense of the successes and failures a new language.
in their lives. As such, it is essentially construc- An important development of attribution the-
tivist in its underpinnings and encompasses the ory has been the inclusion of attribution dimen-
notions of the self as learner and locus of control,
sions (Russell, McAuley, & Tarico, 1987; Weiner,
but, again, it tends to have generated mainly posi- 1986). Originally, Weiner et al. (1979) proposed
tivist research of a quantitative nature. two dimensions of causal attributions: "locus of
Attributions for success and failure in the field
causality" and "stability." Locus of causality refers
of language learning have been investigated rela-
to the perceived location of a cause as internal or
tively little, though their importance has been external to the learner, whereas stability repre-
stressed by Dornyei (1994), Oxford and Shearin
sents the potential changeability of a cause over
(1994), Crookes and Schmidt (1991), and Ske- time. A further dimension that was added later
han (1989). The current study was a preliminary concerned the extent to which an event or out-
investigation into children's developing attribu-
come is under the control of the learner or par-
tions in language learning and was designed to
ticipant. Thus, an 8-cell, three-dimensional at-
explore some of the underlying assumptions that tributional model to account for the causes of
underpin attribution theory. success and failure was constructed (Weiner,
1986). (See Table 2)
ATTRIBUTION THEORY

Although attribution theory originated in the

TABLE 1
work of Heider (1944, 1958), its most influential
Weiner's Original Model of Attribution
exponent has been Weiner (1986), whose "state- Dimensions and Elements
ment of theory" has been widely acknowledged as
guiding research in this area (Rogers, 1987). The Locus of Causality
central tenet of this theory is that a person's af- Internal External
fective and cognitive reactions to success or fail-
ure on an achievement task are a function of the
Stable ability task difficulty
Unstable effort luck
causal attributions that are used to explain why a
particular outcome occurred (Whitley & Frieze, Note. From Biddle, 1993, p.

This content downloaded from 93.142.161.48 on Fri, 29 Nov 2019 10:14:54 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Marion Williams and Robert Burden 195

TABLE 2
Causes of Success and Failure, Classified According to Locus, Stability, and Controllability

Locus of Causality

Internal External

Stable Unstable Stable Unstable

Controllable typical effort immediate effort teacher bias unusual help from others
Uncontrollable ability mood task difficulty luck

Note. From Weiner, 1979, p. 7.

Standard attribution theory involvement suggests andthat

learningindi-
goals rather than ego
viduals' approaches to an achievement involvement andorperformance
learning goals. However,
task can be understood in terms of (a) whether Holt (1969) and others have suggested that the
they see the main causes of their successes and nature of schooling is largely oriented in the op-
failures as stemming from themselves or others, posite direction, particularly at the secondary
(b) whether this is a fixed attribute or open to stage, with an emphasis on performance goals.
change, and (c) whether possible change lies The kinds of goals that students set for them-
within their own control or that of others. Earlyselves are influenced by the whole learning situ-
attribution theory also suggested that most people
ation.

tend to invoke very similar reasons for their suc-

cesses and failures, although research has not
PURPOSE AND RESEARCH QUESTIONS
tended to bear this out.
Most of the research on this topic has been car-This article describes a small-scale, preliminary
ried out in limited areas of achievement, such as investigation into the development of learners'
sport (Biddle, 1993), and within experimental attributions for their perceived successes and fail-
rather than "real-world" situations. Little is known, ures in foreign language learning. In particular,
moreover, about the ways in which attributions be-we were interested in whether school pupils of
gin to take shape from a developmental perspec- different ages tend to construct different types of
tive, with one or two notable exceptions (Dweck & attributions and in the potential implications of
Leggett, 1988; Nicholls, 1978, 1979, 1992). these for teaching a language at different stages
of the curriculum. Our specific research ques-
MOTIVATIONAL STYLE tions were:
1. How do learners of different ages conceptu-
One further area of learning theory related alise theto
notion of doing well in their attempts to
the present study is concerned with thelearn setting of language?
a foreign
learning goals. Cognitive psychologists have 2. How do learners of different ages determine
pointed to a distinction between two different how well their learning of a language is progress-
types of goal orientation that have been variously ing?
described as (a) "performance versus mastery" 3. What reasons do learners of different ages
goals (Ames, 1992), (b) "performance versus attribute to their perceived successes and failures
learning" goals (Dweck & Leggett, 1988), and in learning a language?
(c) "ego involvement versus task involvement" 4. What actions do learners of different ages
(Nicholls, 1979). Each of these descriptors draws see as necessary in order to do well in learning a
the distinction between "performance," where foreign language?
the prime concern is to look good, or, at least, not For the purpose of this study, our operational
to look stupid, by performing better than others, definition of success was "doing well," because we
and "learning," where the goal is to increase found that this term was far more comprehensi-
knowledge, skill, or understanding. In the words ble to children than "succeed." In doing so, we
of Dweck (1985, p. 291), "put simply, with per- deviated slightly from the original theory, which
formance goals an individual aims to look smart, is concerned with notions of success and failure.
whereas with learning goals the individual aims at However, for this preliminary study, we felt that a
becoming smarter." detailed investigation of learners' conceptions of
In teaching a new language within school set- what is meant by doing well and how they deter-
tings, it is clearly important to emphasise task mine if they are doing well would help us to

This content downloaded from 93.142.161.48 on Fri, 29 Nov 2019 10:14:54 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
196 The Modern Language Journal 83 (1999)

understand the reasons that learners of different and what they thought of them before moving on
ages construct for their successes and failures, to the interview questions.
and, in addition, provide some useful informa-
tion for language teachers.
Data Analysis

METHODOLOGY The interviews were tape-recorded and tran-

scribed. The data were content analysed in three
In keeping with the constructivist stance dis- groups, (a) Year 6, (b) Year 7, and (c) Years 9 and
cussed above, our research was carried out within 10, and comparisons were drawn among them. In
an interpretative rather than a positivist frame- keeping with the principles of a grounded ap-
work. We therefore used qualitative methods to proach, we allowed the data to suggest groupings
collect and interpret the data (Denzin & Lincoln, rather than approaching the data with any prede-
1994). A structured interview schedule was de- termined categories (Strauss & Corbin, 1990).
vised based on the research questions. This inter- The students' responses were listed in specific
view schedule passed through five pilot stages descriptive phrases, after which each of the re-
before we felt the questions could be understood searchers searched for natural groupings and
by the younger as well as the older pupils. The key overarching constructs. The researchers then
questions asked in the final version of the inter- compared and discussed the resulting groupings
view schedule are presented in the Appendix. until they reached consensus on the groupings.

Participants RESULTS

Four school year groups were selected for the In this section we discuss the first two research
study; Year 6 (ages 10-11), Year 7 (ages 11-12), questions together.
Year 9 (ages 13-14), and Year 10 (ages 14-15) in
"How do learners of different ages conceptualise the
three schools where French was taught in the
notion of doing well in learning French?"
Southwest of England. This can be seen as an
opportunity sample of schools since a second lan- "How do learners of different ages determine how
guage is traditionally not taught in British pri- well their learning of a language is progressing?"
mary schools. Twelve participants were inter-
viewed from year 6 and 12 from year 7. The We began by asking the question, '"What does it
mean to do well in French?" but found that this
French teacher in each case graded the children
notion was too difficult for many primary school
as high, moderate, or low in ability. Two boys and
two girls were selected randomly from each ability children to explain. In most instances their re-
band in each of these groups. Six participants sponses tended to be tautologous, including
were selected from year 9 and six from year 10 in phrases like "being good at it," or "doing it OK,"
the same manner. but in a few instances they also gave more specific
explanations such as, "taking stuff in," "saying the
right things," or "learning so you can remember."
Procedure
However, the generally unsatisfactory nature of
these responses in an initial pilot study led us to
Each participant was interviewed personally by
abandon this question and focus on what was
one of the researchers in quiet, comfortable sur-
originally a follow-up question, "How can you tell
roundings in his or her school for a period of
how well you're doing in French?" This question
20-25 minutes. The interviews were introduced
produced more helpfully differentiated re-
in a relaxed manner with the following words:
sponses, which showed interesting differences
among the year groups. Table 3 summarizes the
I understand you learn French in your school. I'd like
responses of the three groups of respondents to
to find out what you think about it and how well you
think you're getting on. Would you mind talkingthe to reworded question.
me about that? You don't have to if you don't want to,
At Year 6, there was clearly a strong reliance on
but I would be really interested in what you think. I
feedback from the teacher. This reliance is re-
won't tell anyone your name, and I won't tell anyone
flected in such comments as, 'If you say it right
what you tell me if you don't want me to.
and Mr. R. says 'good,"' "When the teacher asks a
The researchers and children then proceeded question, you give a quick answer," and "Mr. R.
with an informal discussion for a few minutes says I'm doing awfully well." At Year 7, there was
still a dependence on the teacher for feedback,
about what the pupils did in their French lessons

This content downloaded from 93.142.161.48 on Fri, 29 Nov 2019 10:14:54 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Marion Williams and Robert Burden 197

TABLE 3
Response to Question "How can you tell how well you are doing in French?"

YEAR 6 YEAR 7 YEARS 9 and 10

**teacher feedback **teacher feedback **teacher feedback

*sense of achievement/competence *sense of competence/achievement friends
comparison with others confidence understanding
parents sense of achievement

Note. ** response from > 50% of res

but a greater sense of competence began to Table 4 reveals that the main developmental dif-
emerge, including a developing sense of internal- ferences between younger and older language
ity, for instance, 'If you find the work hard or learners is the widening range of attributions in-
easy," 'You're confident in yourself," "After dis- voked to account for success in this domain.

cussion with somebody in class you can tell you've Younger pupils placed greatest emphasis on lis-
done well because you feel good." tening and concentrating, accounting for learn-
Responses to the follow-up question, "If the ing mostly in terms of remembering and, to a
teacher didn't tell you, would you still be able to lesser extent, practice. By Year 7, the notion of
tell how well you're doing?" provided further evi- effort, "Because I try hard," came to receive equal
dence of a decreasing sense of dependency on prominence with listening and concentrating,
the teacher. In Year 6, six pupils answered "yes," and other attributions, such as interest and enjoy-
and six answered "no"; by Year 7, only two re- ment in the work, for instance, 'You understand
sponded with a definite "no." By Years 9 and 10, it if you enjoy it," were beginning to be men-
however, 10 out of 12 pupils referred to teacher tioned also. By this stage, the children also recog-
feedback in the form of marks, grades, or test nised the quality of the teacher, as in 'The
results as their main way of telling how well their teacher explains well, so the work is not too
language learning was progressing. Although hard." It is interesting to note that in the majority
they drew on other sources of information, an of instances, in both Year 6 and Year 7, the attri-
internal sense of understanding or achievement butions for success were internal.
appears to play only a secondary role. By Years 9 and 10, effort was clearly the most
significant reason attributed for success. How-
Perceived Reasons for Doing Well ever, two other strongly emerging factors here
were help and encouragement from others, such
We will now discuss the research question, as friends, parents, and teachers, as in "My par-
"What reasons do learners attribute to their per- ents say it will be good for me to do well," "My
ceived successes and failures in learning French?" mum/friend helps me," and a growing awareness

TABLE 4
Perceived Reasons for Doing Well

YEAR 6 YEAR 7 YEARS 9 and 10

**listening and concentrating **listening and concentrating ** trying hard

*learning and remembering **trying hard **help from others
*practising *interest and enjoyment *ability
*ease of work *ease of work
*teacher *circumstances
teacher
materials
mood
liking
experience
strategies
Note. ** response from > 50% of respondents. * response from > 25% of respondents.

This content downloaded from 93.142.161.48 on Fri, 29 Nov 2019 10:14:54 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
198 The Modern Language Journal 83 (1999)

of aptitude, as in 'I must have an aptitude for it," What was particularly clear by Years 9 and 10 is
and "I pick it up quickly." Also significant here is that a much wider range of attributions was being
the possible experience gained from a school trip drawn upon, sometimes by the same child, to
to France, for example, 'I went on the French account for both success and failure. A mixture of
exchange last year and that's helped," and, "I've internal and external attributions was given, but
learned phrases from being in France, although the majority of these attributions were internal.
I don't know what they all mean." This was confirmed by a 100% internal response
to the question, "Is doing well up to you or some-
one else?"
Perceived Reasons for Not Doing Well Finally, we will discuss responses to the re-
search question, "What actions do learners of dif-
Table 5 shows a summary of reasons for not
ferent ages see as necessary in order to do well in
doing well. Among the younger children, reasons
learning a foreign language?" For practical rea-
for success and failure were seen as opposite sides
sons, we were unable to collect responses to this
of the same coin. Thus, not listening or concen-
question from children in Year 6. Year 7 pupils
trating were the main reasons given by the major-
responded mainly in terms of listening harder.
ity of Year 6 and Year 7 children for not doing well
All of the Year 9 and Year 10 pupils considered
in their early attempts at learning French. How-
that it would be possible to perform better in
ever, even at this stage, some children were al-
their French lessons. However, when asked ex-
ready beginning to see the task as too difficult for
actly what they would have to do to improve, they
them. By Year 7, the pupils began citing lack of
revealed a limited range of strategies, tending to
effort as a cause of failure, stating, for example,
fall back on extra effort, practice, and revision
'Cos I don't listen, don't work hard enough,
coupled with listening to the teacher and asking
don't think about what I'm doing," and, "Cos I
for help. A "shallow" rather than a "deep" ap-
talk a lot and get distracted," thereby showing a
proach to learning appeared to predominate.
considerable degree of internal responsibility.
(See Table 6)
By Years 9 and 10, the students viewed the issue
of distraction from the task as a significant factor:
"Friends interfere," "Friends distract me," and, DISCUSSION
"If your friends aren't working, you don't want to
work." This notion seems to apply across the abil- It is important to reiterate at this point the
ity range. Also looming large at this stage, againsmall-scale, preliminary nature of this study. At
somewhat surprisingly across the ability range, best, it serves as a pilot study of a hypothesis-gen-
was the notion of task difficulty: "Sometimes the erating nature, which, we hope, will give rise to
work is just too difficult," "Sometimes I don't try further studies involving more students. Never-
because the work is hard," and, "Perhaps I should theless, we believe that some interesting and po-
ask for more help when the work is difficult." tentially useful insights have been generated
Perception of ability also emerges more clearly about these pupils' constructions of success and
at this stage than it does in earlier years. However, failure in learning a new language, about the
children rated by their teacher as doing well men- motivational styles that appear to be encouraged,
tioned ability more often than children identified and about the nature of attributions in language
by their teacher as performing less well. learning.

TABLE 5
Perceived Reasons for Not Doing Well

YEAR 6 YEAR 7 YEARS 9 and 10

**not listening/concentrating **not listening/concentrating **not listening/concentrating

work too hard *distraction by others **distraction by others
not remembering/understanding not working hard enough *work too hard
not practising bad mood *lack of revision
dislike of subject *lack of effort
work too hard *lack of ability
not understanding *poor teaching
*lessons missed

Note. ** response from > 50% of respondents. *response from > 25% of respondents.

This content downloaded from 93.142.161.48 on Fri, 29 Nov 2019 10:14:54 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Marion Williams and Robert Burden 199

TABLE 6 cess by such internal factors as communicating

Responses to "What do you have to do to do welleffectively or understanding what was said did not
in French?"
figure prominently in our findings.
YEAR 7 YEARS 9 and 10 The range of attributions that the children
gave for success and failure was slightly broader
**listen *listen to the teacher
than that suggested in the early literature on this
*perform correctly *practise
topic (see Tables 1 and 2). It included interest or
*be good at various aspects *work hard
liking, circumstances, experience, knowledge of
*participate/contribute revise
try your best study the book appropriate strategies, distraction by peers, and
concentrate standard of teaching. These attributions were
use of dictionary probably not as wide ranging as those reported by
stop talking Little (1985) because of the small scale of this

Note. **response from > 50% of respondents. *re- study. Furthermore, the only attributions that ap-
sponse from > 25% of respondents. peared to be specifically related to language were
circumstances (e.g., visiting France) and strate-
gies (e.g., "because I guess what words mean"),
although this was mentioned by only one student.
An important omission from most research
into attributions has been an examination of A significant finding from this study was that
the internal attributions of effort and listening
what "success" or "doing well" means to individu-
were frequently cited. However the participants
als, as well as how their conceptions of success
and failure are constructed. Our belief at the
made hardly any mention of intelligent effort,
outset of this research was that such constructions
that is, the application of appropriate strategies
for achieving success in learning the language.
might vary from one subject area to another, as
This omission seems to be particularly noteworthy
well as from one individual to another. At the
in view of the vast literature on learning strategies
same time, learners of different ages might also
and the importance of learner training. It appears
construct these notions differently.
that many of the important messages contained
The results of this study showed clear differ-
within this literature may not be filtering through
ences between different age groups in their con-
to teachers in the language classroom.
structions of success and in the range of attribu-
tions provided for success and failure. Whereas
CONCLUSIONS
pupils in Years 6 and 7 saw the main reasons for
success as listening and concentrating, those in Individual attributions for success and failure
Years 9 and 10 provided a wider range of attribu-
appear to be formed by a complex interplay
tions, including ability, level of work, circum-
among internal feelings and developmental
stances, and the influence of others. Whereas
stage, external influences, and social context. It is
such variations may well reflect developmental
important to understand, therefore, the way in
and maturational differences between the age which individuals make sense of external influ-
groups, it is apparent from the responses that the
ences to shape internal attributions. Such exter-
attributions are also socially constructed. Notions nal influences include the way teachers teach,
of success and failure are shaped by the expecta- teachers' aims, and their beliefs about learning
tions and demands of the curriculum and by so- and the nature of education.
cial interactions with significant others such as The messages that teachers convey in different
teachers, parents, and peers. In Years 6 and 7, ways affect their learners' developing notions of
most children knew when they were doing well what is meant by success and failure and how
from feedback from their teachers or parents and these are judged. If the emphasis in the class-
from comparison with peers, although there was room is on achieving high marks, then marks,
some evidence that internal feelings of compe- rather than an internal sense of the development
tence began developing by Year 7. By secondary of linguistic or communicative competence, will
school, however, for most pupils doing well in become the benchmark of success or failure. If
French meant performing well enough to receive the focus is on developing learners' ability to
good marks, or grades, rather than being aware learn effectively, to use appropriate strategies in-
of developing particular skills for using or learn- telligently, and to develop autonomy, self-aware-
ing the language. It seems, therefore, that, in this ness, and metacognitive self-monitoring strate-
sense, French is not seen as very different from gies, then more internal attributions are likely to
other school subjects. The notion of judging suc- develop. Similarly, the classroom ethos, whether

This content downloaded from 93.142.161.48 on Fri, 29 Nov 2019 10:14:54 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
200 The Modern Language Journal 83 (1999)

it is competitive or cooperative, will affect the Bandura, A. R. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying
attributions constructed by the learners in the theory of behavioural change. Psychological Review,
classroom. 41, 191-215.

At a broader level, the whole school environ-
ment and the ways in which the curriculum is
organized are likely to influence teachers' actions.
A school with a high emphasis on examination
achievement is bound to generate certain kinds of
feelings about success and failure, and, paradoxi- Crookes, G., & Schmidt, R. (1991). Motivation: Reopen-
cally, may not foster in learners an ability to make
sense of their own language learning in the most
Bandura, A. R. (1997). Self-efficacy; The exercise of control.
New York: Freeman.
Biddle, S. (1993). Attribution research and sport psy-
chology. In R. Singer, M. Murphy, & L.Tennand
(Eds.), Handbook of research on sport psychology (pp.
437-464). New York: Macmillan.
ing the research agenda. Language Learning, 41,
469-512.

helpful way. Such an environment tends to en- Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. (1994). Handbook of qualita-
courage learners to focus on "task involvement" tive research. London: Sage.
Donato, R., & McCormick, D. (1994). A sociocultural
rather than "ego involvement" (Nicholls, 1979) or
perspective on language learning strategies: The
on "performance" rather than "learning goals"
role of mediation. Modern Language Journal, 78,
(Dweck & Leggett, 1988), and may, therefore, not
453-464.
be the most effective way of fostering language
Dornyei, Z. (1994). Motivation and motivating in the
learning. foreign language classroom. Modern Language Jour-
The data arising from this small-scale study nal, 78, 273-284.
have specific implications for language teachers Dweck, C., & Leggett, E. L. (1988). A social-cognitive
as well as broader messages. By directing our at- approach to motivation and personality. Psychologi-
tention to the ways in which learners interpret cal Review, 95, 256-273.
their successes and failures in learning a lan- Findley, M.J., & Cooper, H. M. (1983). Locus of control
and academic achievement: A literature review.
guage, we have shed some light on how learners
make sense of their learning situations in a more Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44,
419-427.
general way. Weiner's original work paid too little
Hansford, B. C., & Hattie,J. A. (1982). The relationship
attention to the nature of the context in which
between self and achievement/performance
attributions are formed. In addition, the mean-
measures. Review of Educational Research, 52,
ings of such terms as effort and ability to different 123-142.
users are more complex than the original theory
Heider, F. (1944). Social perception and phenomenal
would have us believe. causality. Psychological Review, 51, 358-374.
More research into this area seems to be war- Heider, F. (1958). The psychology of interpersonal relations.
ranted. We see a need for a larger sample of New York: Wiley.
learners and more in-depth investigation into Holt, J. (1969). The underachieving school. London: Pen-
how individuals change their attributions over guin.
time within different contexts. Gender differ- Little, A. (1985). The child's understanding of the
causes of academic success and failure: A case
ences and the effects of success in learning a
study of British schoolchildren. British Journal of
language may prove to be significant factors also.
Educational Psychology, 55, 11-23.
The general implications for language teach-
Nicholls,J. D. (1978). The development of the concepts
ers, however, are clear. Like all other teachers, of effort and ability, perception of academic at-
they have considerable influence on the ways in tainment, and the understanding that difficult
which their learners make sense of their learning tasks require more ability. Child Development, 49,
and construct notions of success and failure. The 800-814.

messages that teachers convey in their class- Nicholls, J. D. (1979). Development of perception of
rooms, both explicitly and implicitly, about what own attainment and causal attributions for success

they consider successful learning to be will pro- and failure in reading. Journal of Educational Psy-
chology, 49, 94-99.
foundly affect their learners' developing notions
Nicholls,J. D. (1992). Students as educational theorists.
of themselves as learners as well as their progress
In D. H. Schunk & J. L. Meece (Eds.), Student
in learning a language.
perceptions in the classroom (pp. 267-286). London:
Lawrence Erlbaum.
Oxford, R., & Shearin, J. (1994). Language learning
REFERENCES
motivation: Expanding the theoretical framework.
Modern Language Journal, 78, 12-28.
Pope,
Ames, C. (1992). Classrooms: goals, structures andM. L., & Keen, T. R. (1981). Personal construct
stu-
psychology and education. London: Academic Press.
dent motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology,
84(3), 261-271. Roberts, G., & Pascuzzi, D. (1979). Causal ascription in

This content downloaded from 93.142.161.48 on Fri, 29 Nov 2019 10:14:54 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Marion Williams and Robert Burden 201

sport: Some theoretical implications. Journal of Weiner, B. (1986). An attributional theory of motivation and
Sport Psychology, 1, 203-211. emotion. New York: Springer-Verlag.
Rogers, C. (1987). Attribution theory and motivation in Weiner, B., Russell, D., & Lerman, D. (1979). The cog-
school. In N. Hastings &J. Schwieso (Eds.), New nition-emotion process in achievement related
directions in educational psychology: Behaviour and mo- contexts. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
tivation (pp. 195-212). London: Falmer Press. 37, 1221-1230.
Russell, D., McAuley, E., & Tarico, V. (1987). Measuring Wertsch, J. (Ed.). (1988). Cognition: Vygotskian perspec-
causal attributions for success and failure: A com- tives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
parison of methodologies for assessing causal di- Whitley,J. B., & Frieze, 1. (1985). Children's causal attri-
mensions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychol- butions for success and failure in achievement
ogy, 52, 1248-1257. settings: A meta-analysis. Journal of Educational Psy-
Seifert, T. L. (1997). Academic goals and emotions: Re- chology, 77, 608-616.
sults of a structural equation model and a cluster Williams, M., & Burden, R. L. (1997). Psychology for lan-
analysis. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 6 7, guage teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University
323-338. Press.
Skehan, P. (1989). Individual differences in second language
Wylie, R. (1979). The self concept. Lincoln: University of
learning. London: Arnold. Nebraska Press.

Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative re-

search: Grounded theory procedures and techniques.
London: Sage.
Sutherland, P. (1992). Cognitive development today: Piaget
and his critics. London: Falmer.
APPENDIX
Thomas, L., & Harri-Augstein, S. (1985). Self-organised
Key Questions Asked in the Interviews
learning: Foundations of a conversational science of
psychology. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
von Glasersfeld, E. (1995). Radical constructivism. Lon- Do you like French?
don: Falmer. What do you like the most? The least?
Wang M. (1983). Development and consequences of Do you want to do well in French? Why? Why not?
students' sense of personal control. InJ. M. Levine How well do you think you are doing?
& M. C. Wang (Eds.), Teacher and student percep- Give me an example of when you did well.
tions: Implications for learning (pp. 213-247). When you do well, what are the main reasons? (prompt)
Hillsdale, NJ: LEA. Is doing well up to you or someone else?
Weiner, B. (1979). A theory of motivation for some Do you ever not do well? Give an example.
classroom experiences. Journal of Educational Psy- What are the reasons? (prompt)
chology, 71, 3-25. Is this because of you or someone else?
Weiner, B. (1983). Some methodological pitfalls in at- What do you have to do to do well in French?
tributional research. Journal of Educational Psychol- How can you tell how well you are doing?
ogy, 75, 530-543.

Recipient of AERA Second-Language SIG Outstanding

Dissertation Award

The Second-Language Special Interest Group of AERA announced the winner of its Second-Languag
Outstanding Dissertation Award:

Dr. Yili Li, "Using Task-Based E-mail Activities in Developing Academic Writing Skills in English a
Second Language."

Dr. Li completed her Ph.D. at the University of Arizona under the direction of Dr. Robert Ariew. She is
currently employed at Hong Kong Baptist University. Congratulations to Dr. Li for her achievement.

This content downloaded from 93.142.161.48 on Fri, 29 Nov 2019 10:14:54 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms