Foreign Language Annals - 2010 - Allen - Language Learning Motivation During Short Term Study Abroad An Activity Theory

Foreign Language Annals vol. 43, No.
1 27
Language-Learning Motivation
During Short-Term Study Abroad:
An Activity Theory Perspective
Heather Willis Allen
University of Miami
Abstract: This study investigated the development of language-learning motivation

during short-term study abroad (SA) for six intermediate-level students of French.
Taking an activity theory perspective, findings demonstrated that one of two orienta-
tions motivated participants to study or continue studying French at the college level:
linguistic motives or career-oriented motives. The choice to study abroad was seen as
either a critical step to achieving fluency or a means of travel and cultural learning.
Enhanced language-learning motivation emerged to varying degrees for participants
with linguistically oriented motives for learning French who viewed SA as a language-
learning experience but not for participants with primarily pragmatic reasons
for learning French and participating in SA. Implications of the study include the need
for curricular intervention in student learning abroad.
Key words: French, activity theory, learning motivation, second language learning,
self-regulation, study abroad
Introduction
From the 1960s through the mid-1990s, research on study abroad (SA) largely
supported the notion that it is an ideal means of learning a foreign language.
Moreover, foreign language professionals often impart this view to students, typi-
cally based on their own successful if not life-transforming experiences (Kinginger,
2008). As Davidson (2007) explained, ‘‘[I]t has long been understood that lan-
guage acquisition at the highest levels of proficiency is generally not possible
without a substantial immersion experience’’ (p. 277). However, current trends in
American students’ SA choices as well as insights from recent research revealing
unsupported myths about SA may put some of the foreign language profession’s
assumptions about it in question.
A tempered assessment of SA emerges in light of studies shifting the focus from
outcomes to a closer examination of processes at work during SA and perspectives of
SA participants. Some key findings from these studies are that participants limit time
spent with native speakers in favor of speaking their own language with peers (Freed,
Segalowitz, & Dewey, 2004; Wilkinson, 1998, 2000) and that native speakers limit
pragmatically appropriate language use so that they can be more readily understood
Heather Willis Allen (PhD, Emory University) is Assistant Professor of Second

Language Acquisition and French at the University of Miami, Coral Gables, Florida.
19449720, 2010, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1944-9720.2010.01058.x by Oxford University, Wiley Online Library on [10/07/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
28 Spring 2010
by SA participants (Iino, 2006; Siegal, 1995). has relied mainly on surveys to measure
Furthermore, SA participants’ access to social change in students’ attitudes, motivations,
networks that would most enhance their and perceptions. For instance, whereas
foreign language learning are particularly Ingram (2005) and Lewis and Niesenbaum
challenging for women (Kinginger, 2004; (2005) concluded that short-term SA
Polanyi, 1995), who represent almost two- enhanced students’ motivation to continue
thirds of Americans studying abroad (Insti- foreign language study or travel abroad,
tute of International Education, 2008; see Allen and Herron (2003) found no change
http://opendoors.iienetwork.org/). Given these in students’ motivation or attitudes related
findings, it is more apparent why learning is to foreign language study or French culture
not evenly distributed among SA partici- after short-term SA. Results of large-scale
pantsFeven those in the same programF comparative studies (Dwyer, 2004; Koester,
and why learning outcomes are not as 1985) of motivational and personal benefits
dramatic as the foreign language profession of shorter (1–3 months) vs. longer (3–12
might believe (Churchill & DuFon, 2006; months) SA programs have reported that
Kinginger, 2008). longer programs resulted in more signifi-
These insights from research are even cant and enduring impact.
more salient given present trends in SA Potential shortcomings associated with
participation by U.S. students. Whereas SA short-term SA may relate to how such pro-
once followed a ‘‘Junior Year Abroad model’’ grams are designed, typically as ‘‘sheltered’’
largely comprising foreign language majors, programs wherein students integrate into a
this is no longer the case: The majority host institution yet remain in a peer group
of students now participate in programs of with others sharing their first language or
less than eight weeks’ duration, whereas ‘‘island’’ programs organized by U.S. faculty
less than 5% do so for an academic year in overseas facilities. As a result, students
(Institute of International Education, 2008; may experience superficial cultural contact,
Kinginger, 2008; see also http://opendoors. inadequate language use opportunities, and
iienetwork.org/). As to who studies abroad, a vacation mentality. Ingram (2005) ex-
foreign language majors constitute only a plained that short-term SA programs are
small percentage (7.2) of SA participants, not always well conceived and historically
with majors in social sciences (21%), busi- have not been integrated within foreign
ness and management (19%), and humanities language curricula by academic depart-
(13%) outnumbering them appreciably ments choosing to prioritize semester- or
(Institute of International Education, 2008; year-long programs despite trends toward
see http://opendoors.iienetwork.org/). shorter SA stays by American students.
As to benefits associated with short-
term SA, research has produced few gener-
alizations, conceivably due to variation
Purpose of the Study
in instruments, variables investigated, and
Given the prevalence of U.S. students’ par-
study settings and cohorts. Although some
ticipation in short-term SA and the foreign
studies have reported significant gains
language profession’s limited understand-
in foreign language proficiency (Allen &
ing of its benefits, the present study
Herron, 2003; Simões, 1996) associated
investigated how intermediate-level foreign
with short-term SA, others have cast doubt
language students’ language-learning moti-
on its ability to bring about significant lin-
vation evolved during a six-week SA
guistic gain (Davidson, 2007; Freed, 1990)
program. In particular, this study sought to
or change superior to that of at-home im-
answer the following questions:
mersion (Freed et al., 2004). The limited
existing research on nonlinguistic benefits 1. What motives informed participants’
of short-term SA is also inconclusive and engagement in foreign language learn-
Foreign Language Annals vol. 43, No. 1 29
ing, and how did SA participation relate pation, language proficiency, and persistence
to these motives? in language learning.
2. What goals did participants have for Beginning in the 1990s, criticisms of
SA, and what elements afforded or con- this body of work emerged (Crookes &
strained the realization of these goals Schmidt, 1991; Oxford & Shearin, 1994)
during SA? centered on the increasing gap between
3. Did participation in SA enhance partici- mainstream and foreign language motiva-
pants’ language-learning motivation and tional theories and a desire for increased
persistence in foreign language learning? convergence (Dörnyei, 2001). Whereas
researchers involved in this shift repre-
These questions are consistent with an
sented various perspectives, their work
activity theory perspective on motivation
foregrounded two elements mediating
and designed to respond to the notion
language-learning motivation that they
that short-term SA, while less beneficial
believed were not given full consideration
than longer programs for linguistic gain,
in previous research: the learning context
may motivate lower-level students to con-
and students’ own perceptions of their abil-
tinue studying the foreign language at
ities, performances, and possibilities (Mills,
advanced levels (Davidson, 2007) or to
Pajares, & Herron, 2007; Ushioda, 2008).
participate in future SA programs of longer
Attempting to broaden the concept of
duration (Magnan & Back, 2007).
language-learning motivation, Dörnyei and
his colleagues elaborated a comprehensive
process model of motivation with three
Background levels: the language, learner, and learning
Research has shown that motivational factors situation (Dörnyei & Ottó, 1998). Later,
play an important role in foreign language this model was refined to include longitu-
learning outcomes, academic performance, dinal aspects of motivation (Dörnyei, 2001,
and student persistence. However, research- 2005). Its sensitivity to temporality is criti-
ers have disagreed as to what motivation is, cal given studies showing that motivation
what factors affect it, and how motivational tends to diminish over time as the enthusi-
processes function (Ushioda, 2008). This asm of learning a new language wears
section briefly reviews research on language- off (Bernhaus, Moore, & Azevedo, 2007;
learning motivation and defines motivation Williams, 2004).
from an activity-theoretic perspective. Also beginning in the 1990s, coinciding
with the cognitive revolution in motivational
psychology, language-learning researchers
The Evolving Concept of Motivation in began focusing on how students’ motivated
Language-Learning Research engagement in learning is shaped by their
A social psychological perspective on moti- patterns of thinking, drawing on attribution
vation (Gardner, 1985) dominated language- theory, self-determination theory, and social
learning research from the late 1950s until cognitive theory (Dörnyei, 2003; Ushioda,
the 1990s, concentrating on two orientations 2008). The roles of intrinsic motivation
to motivation: an integrative one, or iden- (i.e., to learn something as an end in itself for
tification with and willingness to adopt its own rewards) and extrinsic motivation
behavioral features of another linguistic (i.e., to learn something as a means to some-
community, and an instrumental one, or em- thing else) in language learning and their
phasis on the practical value of language relation to other motivational constructs
learning. According to quantitative studies of have been investigated using self-determina-
individual difference variables by Gardner tion theory by Noels (2003, 2005) and
and his associates, integrative motivation was others (Bonney, Cortina, Smith-Darden, &
found to predict students’ classroom partici- Fiori, 2008; Vandergrift, 2005). According to
30 Spring 2010
Ushioda (2008), both of these motivations An Activity-Theoretic Approach to

are valuable, but the critical factor lies in Motivation and Learning
whether they are internalized and self- Vygotskian cultural-historical psychology
determined or externally imposed and (Vygotsky, 1978), often called sociocultural
regulated by others. theory (Lantolf & Thorne, 2006) in lan-
The concept of self-regulation, or the guage-learning research, is a theory of mind
process by which learners activate and sus- ‘‘that recognizes the central role that social
tain cognition, behavior, and motivation, was relationships and culturally constructed ar-
relatively absent from language-learning tifacts play in organizing uniquely human
research until the late 1990s (McDonough, forms of thinking’’ (Lantolf, 2004, pp. 30–
2001), and research on how language learn- 31). Thus, research informed by sociocul-
ers can develop motivational self-regulation tural theory focuses not just on learning
skills is still limited (Ushioda, 2008). Of outcomes but also on learners’ mediated
the three types of self-regulatory strategies participation in social interactions with
identified by Dörnyei (2001), motivation- others (Pavlenko & Lantolf, 2000). Learn-
maintenance, goal-setting (Gillette, 1994), ing, from this perspective, is first organized
and language-learning strategies, only the and regulated by more competent others
last has received significant attention by for- (e.g., a parent or teacher) with the goal that
eign language researchers (Mills et al., 2007). the learner will eventually appropriate reg-
Yet as researchers in educational psychology ulatory means and assume an agentic
shifted their interest from learning strategies regulatory role in his or her own learning;
to self-regulation, language-learning re- thus, the ultimate goal of learning is inde-
searchers also began turning to constructs pendent problem-solving (Lantolf, 2000).
related to self-regulation including perceived Mediation is a key concept in sociocultural
competence (Baker & MacIntyre, 2003), theory, meaning that humans’ relationships
willingness to communicate (MacIntyre, to their world are established using physical
2007), and self-efficacy (Mills et al., 2007). and psychological tools with language as
The common thread among these is a view the primary tool for directing and control-
that learners need more than motivation ling behavior and relating to the world
from within; they must also see themselves as (Lantolf & Appel, 1994). It follows from
agents of the processes shaping their motiva- this perspective that motivation is not
tion (Ushioda, 2008). Short of this, they may located solely within an individual but is
fall into patterns of negative thinking and constructed and constrained by the learning
self-perceptions with detrimental motiva- context and evolves as individuals partici-
tional consequences (Ushioda, 2007). pate in learning activity.
Research on motivation in language Interestingly, although sociocultural
learning has progressed tremendously over theory seems well-suited for research on
the past two decades, moving beyond a motivation and learning, its motivational
once-dominant social psychological para- dimension remains relatively undertheo-
digm and its psychometric approach toward rized, as researchers have concentrated more
more robust theoretical approaches from on cognitive aspects of the theory (Ushioda,
motivational and educational psychology 2007). However, activity theory, by unifying
that take into account cognitive and con- various concepts from sociocultural theory
textual aspects of motivation. This study and explicitly focusing on the motivational
attempted to account for both cognitive dimension of human activities, is a useful
(or internal) and social/contextual (or exter- lens for analyzing motivational processes in
nal) aspects of motivation by using activity language learning (Ushioda, 2007).
theory to approach language-learning moti- Activity theory (Engeström, 1999;
vational processes. Leont’ev, 1978, 1981) holds that human
FIGURE 1
The Development of Motivation From an Activity Theory Perspective
Need + Object Motive + Goal + Participation Motivation
Source: Kim, 2007
activities are motivated by specific biologi- renegotiated with those around the indi-
cal or culturally constructed needs. A need vidual (Lantolf & Pavlenko, 2001). Kim
becomes a motive once directed at an object (2007), in a thesis exploring the develop-
(the activity’s focus or orientation), giving ment of English-learning motivation for
direction to the activity (Engeström, 1999). Korean immigrants in Canada from an ac-
Motives, or the cultural-psychological- tivity theory perspective, explained:
institutional impetus guiding activity toward
Conflicts between the subject, object,
an object, are considered inherently unstable,
and tools and the subject’s community as
gaining or losing power depending on the
well as rules and division of labor may
conditions, content, and course of activity
hinder the transformation of a motive
(Lantolf & Thorne, 2006; Lompscher, 1999).
into a motivation. For example, if ten-
Activities are instantiated concretely as goal-
sion exists between an L2 learner and
oriented actions, and goals, in contrast with
her L2 community, such as a homestay
motives, which explain why someone en-
family or an ESL class, her motive to
gages in activity, have clear start and end
learn the L2 may not be transformed into
points and relate to specific actions (Eng-
a motivation. (p. 39)
eström, 1999; Kim, 2007; Lantolf & Thorne,
2006). Thus, goals have a regulatory function In fact, past research using activity the-
in activity and are, like motives, unstable as ory to investigate foreign language learning
they are modified, postponed, and even during SA has demonstrated that language-
abandoned (Lantolf & Appel, 1994). learning motivation was shaped by both
From an activity theory perspective, learners’ beliefs about the foreign language
motivation for language learning (illustrated and language learning and by their struggles
in Figure 1) results from the alignment of a to access social networks affording learning
motive and goal with a sense of participation (Douglass, 2007; Kinginger, 2004, 2008).
(Lave & Wenger, 1991) in a new community
of practice (Kim, 2007), and the develop-
ment of motivation is contingent on the The Current Study
learner having learned to posit goals for him- The preceding review of literature discussed
or herself (Markova, 1990). As Pavlenko and a number of critical issues related to the
Lantolf (2000) explained, a learner becomes study of motivational processes in language
a participant in a new discursive space learning: namely, the roles of motivation
through intentional social interactions with from within the individual and a supportive
members of the other culture. learning environment to nurture and protect
This conception of how motivational individuals’ motivated learning behavior.
factors coalesce foregrounds learner agency, Agency, or learners’ intentions, actions,
which links motivation to action, as indi- and reactions co-constructed in relation to
viduals position themselves in relation to others, was posited as a key factor in the
the learning process and others in the development and maintenance of motiva-
learning environment. However, agency is tion. Using the theoretical lens of activity
a co-constructed phenomenon, constantly theory, this study focused on the interaction
32 Spring 2010
TABLE 1
Participants’ Demographic Information and Academic Profiles
Pseudonym / Age / Year in Academic Previous Study

Gender College Major of French GPA
Chad / M 19 / Junior Marketing 3 years high school, 3.41
2 semesters college
Elise / F 19 / Sophomore Anthropology 2 semesters college 3.96
Eric / M 23 / Senior Art History, 2 semesters college 3.34
Geology
Molly / F 20 / Junior Studio Arts 4 years high school, 3.18
2 semesters college
Rachel / F 20 / Junior History, 3 years high school, 3.57
Political 2 semesters college
Science
Sam / M 20 / Junior Philosophy, 2 semesters college 3.61
German
Primary major
of these internal and external forces and dents were enrolled in the programF8
how they influenced the development of at the intermediate level and 18 at the
language-learning motivation for six inter- advanced level. Intermediate students com-
mediate-level foreign language students pleted two 3-credit courses, Intermediate
during short-term SA. French I and French Culture and Conver-
sation, and a 1-credit course, French
Creative Writing. The academic curriculum
Participants and Their SA Program
was complemented by weekly cultural ac-
From among a group of eight intermediate-
tivities organized by the program assistant,
level students recruited as participants, I
a graduate student in French from the par-
focused on six in this study, a choice based on
ticipants’ home university. Students were
their participation in all data collectedF
required per program rules to use French to
unlike for the other two students recruited,
communicate in class, cultural activities,
who provided little follow-up after SA. All
and free time spent in the academic facility’s
participants were American and spoke En-
library, kitchen, and computer laboratory.
glish as their first language. Participants’
Students lived with French homestay fami-
demographic and academic profiles appear
lies (one student per family) who provided
in Table 1.
them a private bedroom and daily meals.
The 6-week SA program took place
from mid-May to early July 2006 in Nantes,
a large French city in western France. It was Data and Analysis
an ‘‘island’’-type program, organized by the To investigate the evolution of the partici-
participants’ home university at an overseas pants’ language-learning motivation during
facility managed by an American SA pro- SA, I collected multiple data sources before,
vider, and students were taught by the U.S. during, and after the program, including
program faculty member plus a French questionnaires, interviews, and learning blogs.
professor based in France. In total, 26 stu- By first analyzing data sources separately and
later triangulating them, it was possible for me data multiple times. Several strategies were
to document participants’ perceptions, under- used for verification (Creswell, 1998) of this
stand the meaning of their actions from their study’s emergent analysis. Data were col-
perspective, and interpret how participant lected over a year-long period, including the
perceptions related to stated motives and 6-week SA program, wherein the researcher
goals. interacted with participants multiple times
Participants’ learning blogs, completed weekly, facilitating the development of trust
twice weekly during SA as a component of and engagement. The researcher used multi-
the French Creative Writing course, were ple data types to establish a confluence of
the most comprehensive data source col- evidence, and, conversely, the researcher
lected in this study. Students were instructed searched for negative evidence by looking for
to focus their blog entries on foreign lan- disconfirming evidence to refine working
guage and cultural learning, how and with hypotheses. Member checks took place as
whom time was spent outside class, and how participants re-read and commented on their
personal goals evolved. They were told that blogs and later verified the accuracy of tran-
blogging in French or English was accept- scribed interviews.
able, as was mixing the languages, because Readers of this study should be aware
the rationale for blogging was not foreign that its analysis and findings were based on
language practice but reflection. In practice, how participants represented their SA experi-
the participants’ blogs were written mostly in ences rather than on firsthand observation or
English. Semi-structured interviews con- measurement of participants’ learning be-
ducted in English, digitally recorded, and haviors or learning outcomes by the
transcribed verbatim were another important researcher. Transferability of this study’s im-
data source. Participants were interviewed plications should be interpreted by readers
individually three timesFa month prior to themselves as generalizability of this study’s
SA, at the program’s midpoint, and at its end. findings to other student populations and
Secondary data sources included ques- settings, particularly for programs of differ-
tionnaires, SA application essays, and e-mail ent durations, may not be appropriate.
correspondence between participants and the
researcher during the year following SA.
Students completed the Internet-based ques-
Findings
tionnaires a month before SA and during the
last week of the program. The Pre Study Research Question 1: Participants’
Abroad Questionnaire included a Language- Language-Learning Motives and
Learning History and Language Contact Pro- Choice to Study Abroad
file adapted from Allen (2002), while the Post Despite the fact that all six participants were
Study Abroad Questionnaire included the completing a minor in French and none were
Language Contact Profile plus 18 Study taking French to meet their college’s language
Abroad Impact questions asking participants requirement (all had done so with sufficient
to assess their level of satisfaction with goal high school coursework), their reasons var-
accomplishment and language contact. ied for choosing to learn or continue learning
I identified patterns and themes found in French. In broad terms, two types of motives
the participants’ blogs and interviews using for language learning emergedFone primar-
inductive techniques (Strauss & Corbin, ily linguistic and one primarily pragmatic.
1990) and coded them using a qualitative Participants with a linguistically ori-
analysis program, QSR NVIVO. After initial, ented motive for engaging in learning
unrelated coding categories were established, French (Elise, Sam, Eric, and Molly) spoke
they were clustered into categories contain- of wanting to achieve ‘‘fluency’’ or ‘‘profi-
ing multiple subcategories. This coding ciency’’ to use it in academic, professional,
process was recursive and led to recoding or personal ways. Elise, who planned to
34 Spring 2010
work for the U.S. Foreign Service or State and Rachel) were focused on the advantages
Department, began studying French in col- of obtaining a French minor for their future
lege after excelling at Spanish in high careers but did not elaborate on plans to use
school, including spending 6 weeks in French in the future. Chad, a marketing
Spain. She now envisioned using Spanish major, stated, ‘‘I don’t know exactly what
and French to work with American tourists I’m going to do yet, but if I’m going to have
abroad. Sam and Eric also started French in a French minor and an international cer-
college, realizing it would complement tificate, maybe I’ll do something abroad.’’
their major fields of studyFin Sam’s case, Rachel, majoring in history and political
philosophy, and for Eric, art history. In science, explained that a French minor
Sam’s SA application essay, he explained his would ‘‘increase my chances of employment
goals, which included ‘‘becom[ing] profi- and expand my future opportunities’’ for
cient in German, French, Latin, and working in a congressional think tank or
Ancient Greek,’’ so that he could better read international relations. Neither spoke of
and understand the philosophy he was continuing French after high school based
studying and hoped to continue studying in on a desire to become fluent; rather, Chad
graduate school. He had studied German explained, ‘‘It’s fun . . . I’ve already invested
for 6 years and was now enthusiastic to so much in French,’’ and Rachel similarly
advance his French through SA. Eric was said, ‘‘I took French in high school and
also a successful language learner, having really liked it, so I figured I’d take it again.’’
studied Spanish for 4 years in high school In the same way that participants’ mo-
before starting French. He explained that tives varied for learning French, differences
his art history major included a lot of liter- also emerged in their reasons for studying
ature in French and German, so he was abroad. When the researcher asked partici-
interested in developing his French reading pants in an open-ended fashion to explain
and writing capacities. why they were participating in SA, begin-
Molly differed somewhat from Elise, ning with their most important reason,
Sam, and Eric, who had completed just 2 patterns observed in the participants’
semesters of elementary French, in that she responses generally mirrored those pro-
had studied French for 5 years. She called vided for the two groupings of participants
‘‘becom[ing] fluent’’ a long-term aspiration, regarding their language-learning motives.
yet stated, ‘‘It takes a lot to become fluent For participants with language-
. . . I still have to take Intermediate French oriented motives for learning French, SA
II and conversation and writing [after SA], was seen as an essential experience for
so I’m still going to be working towards that achieving linguistic goals. In Molly’s inter-
goal.’’ She called herself a ‘‘French dork’’ view before SA, she stated that ‘‘everyone
and said she was fascinated by cultural learning a language needs to go and experi-
differences between France and the United ence that language and not within the
States. Interestingly, Molly was not a confi- classroom or within their university . . . it’s
dent language learner and felt ‘‘self-conscious necessary.’’ Similarly, Elise explained want-
about [her] pronunciation’’ and ‘‘inferior’’ to ing to ‘‘learn French in a real setting because
students above her in French. This lack of it is the only real way to truly know a foreign
confidence led her to repeat elementary language.’’ Sam also possessed strong beliefs
French in college. Although she was unsure about immersion, stating in his application
of her future career, she thought translation essay, ‘‘I will never genuinely believe that I
was a possibility, citing the example of a have learned any foreign language until I
cousin who had worked in France as a have practiced it in context with native
translator in a bank. speakers . . . I believe it is necessary for me
Participants with a pragmatically ori- to study in France.’’ Eric too spoke about
ented motive for learning French (Chad being ‘‘wholly engaged’’ in foreign language
learning through SA and explained that be- In summary, prior to SA, differences
ing ‘‘completely engrossed in the language existed between participants motivated to
and culture will really help my comprehen- learn French and participate in SA for pri-
sion with everything. It is really important marily linguistic reasons and participants
to grasping all the aspects of the language.’’ motivated to learn French for career-
Secondary to their linguistic reasons oriented reasons who viewed SA as an op-
for studying abroad, Elise and Eric also saw portunity to experience life in a different
SA as informing future career choices. For culture. The following section demonstrates
Elise, it served as a means to ‘‘make sure how these differing motives impacted how
that foreign relations is what I really want to participants pursued their goals during SA
do,’’ based on her capacity to adapt to a and the realization or non-realization of
foreign culture and language. For Eric, SA those goals.
was a way to enrich his knowledge of the art
and architecture of France.
Research Question 2: Affordances and
Chad and Rachel, who were primarily
motivated to learn French to enhance their
Constraints to Participants’ Goal
professional credentials, saw SA foremost as a Achievement During SA
means of learning about the world beyond the A month before SA, participants described
United States and living in a different culture. their goals for the program; as shown in
Rachel explained this in terms of ‘‘gain[ing] Table 2, these included cultural, linguistic,
more perspective and becom[ing] a better- and social goals. The evolution of partici-
rounded person as a result of experiencing pants’ goals was also traced in blog entries
French culture,’’ whereas Chad said, ‘‘More and reflected upon during interviews and in
than just the language, I’d like to experience the Post Study Abroad Questionnaire. This
another culture.’’ For both, foreign travel and section outlines emergent themes from blog
living with a homestay family were key ele- and interview data related to elements that
ments for cultural learning. As Rachel stated, afforded or constrained goal accomplish-
‘‘I think staying with a homestay family I will ment, with a particular focus on linguistic
get to see a lot of everyday kind of French goals. These elements included two factors
culture . . . by traveling around France, I’ll get related to how participants regulated their
to see some of the broader things.’’ Chad ex- own learning during SAFthrough articulat-
plained that travel was an important priority, ing specific goals and managing conflicting
as he did not imagine returning to Europe goalsFand two factors related to relations
again given the considerable expense he as- participants established with those around
sumed to finance the program. themFnegotiating relationships within the
Unlike the other participants, Chad SA peer group and maximizing relations with
and Rachel named accelerating progress to- French homestay families.
ward the French minor through credits
earned abroad as a major reason for choos- Goal Specificity
ing the summer program in France. Chad Regardless of their motives for language
was forthright about this, explaining, ‘‘I’m learning or reasons for studying abroad,
not just doing it because I want to . . . I participants’ initial goals were, for the most
wouldn’t spend all this money if it wasn’t part, lacking in specificity as to how they
going to benefit my schoolwork.’’ In fact, SA would be realized and defined in real-life
was a requirement for the International terms, particularly for linguistic goals. As
Business certificate Chad was earning, so Table 2 shows, the majority of participants
by participating in the summer program, he described wanting to ‘‘improve’’ or ‘‘work on’’
completed essential credits toward both some aspect of their French capacities, most
the certificate and the French minor in a frequently oral conversational abilities.
relatively short time. However, once abroad, some participants did
36 Spring 2010
TABLE 2
Participants’ Initial Goals for SA
Linguistic Goals Cultural Goals Social Goals

Chad 1. Be able to 1. See as much of Build friendships
communicate with Europe as I can. with French-speaking
someone enough to people my age from
get to know them France and host
on a personal level. family.
2. Improve speaking 2. Understand
and comprehension. differences in
French and
American cultural
perspectives.
Elise 1. Have a conversation Gain an Meet people from
with a French speaker understanding of France and be with
easily but not French culture my [host] family.
necessarily perfectly. not based on
stereotypes and
media.
2. Improve accent and
pronunciation.
Eric 1. Speak the language Get a better
with confidence and understanding of
not be worried about European city life
making mistakes. and urban history.
2. Read more quickly
and with more precise
comprehension.
3. Write with
confidence.
Molly 1. Become confident Learn on a first- Make friends and get
while speaking. hand basis how a relationship with
the French live, my [host] family.
travel, and work.
2. Work on my
pronunciation.
3. Greatly improve my
vocabulary.
Rachel 1. Speak French 1. Do a lot of
better. traveling.
2. Improve my accent 2. Experience as
and pronunciation. much of the
culture as I can.
TABLE 2. (Continued).
Linguistic Goals Cultural Goals Social Goals

Sam 1. Hold a decent Come out of my shell
conversation about and really become a
abstract things in which part of my homestay
I understand native family; have a
French people and they relationship with them
understand me. and keep in touch with
them after I leave.
2. Feel comfortable
speaking and being
spoken to at a
normal pace.
3. Improve
pronunciation (e.g.,
what letters should
not be pronounced).
4. Improve grammar.
5. Improve my
writing.
establish concrete subgoals to instantiate conversations’’ in French, what she saw as

previously unfocused ones; these tended to ‘‘realistic.’’ The next week, in relation to her
be participants with linguistically driven goal to ‘‘greatly improve my vocabulary,’’ she
motives for engaging in language learning described making efforts to remember
and participating in SA. words by using a dictionary and working to
For example, Elise, housed with a 55- improve her reading capacities with French
year-old single French woman, initially had cooking magazines. Sam, who articulated a
difficulty participating in conversations and general goal to better understand and
understanding her host mother. In her blog be understood by French people, aimed to
from week 2 she explained, ‘‘I am trying to make himself understood at the post office,
listen for key turns and phrases in order to bank, and travel agent. He called his
understand my host family.’’ She also de- successful participation in those service
scribed using ‘‘charades’’ to get meaning encounters ‘‘about the most significant ac-
across and ‘‘using the skills [she] learned in complishment I have made’’ in his week 2
Spain to skirt around a word rather than blog. In addition, Eric, who wanted to
looking every word up’’ to facilitate inter- ‘‘write with confidence’’ as a linguistic goal,
actions. Molly also elaborated on concrete described the specific aims of ‘‘writ[ing]
subgoals related to perfecting ‘‘basic speak- more simplified thoughts rather than con-
ing skills’’ in French: During week 2 she verting the sentences word for word.’’
tried to ‘‘tell [her host family] what I am The researcher found examples of goals
going to do or did that day . . . or speak remaining unfocused more often in blogs of
about cooking.’’ Further, she stated a goal to participants whose primary motivation for
‘‘confidently hold at least 20- to 30-minute SA participation was not linguistic. Chad
38 Spring 2010
said in his week 2 blog that he wanted to be focusing on other goals because they both
able to ‘‘fluently talk to my family, joke with related it to money and time constraints.
them, etc., and I know that it is not a real- The significant workload associated with
istic goal.’’ However, he followed that taking seven credit hours entirely in French
statement only by saying, ‘‘I would, how- also caused participants to rethink their goals
ever, like to improve my comprehension skills and activities, and half of the participants
and my grammar before I leave’’ (emphasis (Eric, Elise, and Rachel) commented on this
added), without detailing how he intended in blog entries. For example, by week 2, Eric
to pursue those goals. In his week 4 blog, realized that his academic responsibilities
another imprecise goal statement appeared: were formidableFas he described it, a
‘‘I hope to accelerate my learning pace a little ‘‘balancing act’’:
more before I leave so I know that I got the
It’s quite a lot on top of getting myself
full potential from the program’’ (emphasis
acquainted with and experiencing
added). Similarly, Rachel articulated her
Nantes and going home to my host
linguistic goals vaguely, using the terms
family and interacting with them. I am
improve and increase (e.g., ‘‘improve my
either in the [academic] building or in
communication skills,’’ ‘‘improve my pro-
my room trying to do my homework
nunciation and accent’’), without mention
. . . if I get behind there is no time to
of what improvement would entail. Only in
pull ahead.
relation to cultural exploration and travel
did she describe concrete goals. Elise also felt the pressure of balancing
her priorities, writing in week 3,
I am very stressed . . . I must make good
grades here before applying for a fel-
Goal Conflict
lowship next term, I need to read three
A second important aspect related to how
books for a course I’m taking during
participants pursued goals was related
Summer Term II, and I also have
to how conflicting goals were managed. In
homework, class, and want to spend
certain cases, participants realized that it
time with [my host mother].
was necessary to prioritize one goal over
another or abandon a possible goal in order Although the SA curriculum was struc-
to fulfill a different one. For Molly, travel tured to give students 3-day weekends, with
was something that she could not prioritize. classes held Monday through Thursday, par-
As she explained, ‘‘There is not enough ticipants had difficulty juggling competing
time. Before I came I thought I was going to desires and responsibilities. As I discuss in
travel every weekend, but after the first relation to findings on Research Question
weekend I thought, no, I need to stay here Three, in light of such struggles, some par-
and bond with my family.’’ ticipants abandoned initial linguistic goals to
Eric decided to curtail weekend travel- pursue travel-related goals more singularly.
ing after spending a long weekend in
Ireland and realizing it negatively influ-
enced his linguistic priorities. Upon his Managing Relations with American
return, he wrote, ‘‘[Going] to an English- SA Peers
speaking country for the weekend was not a Some participants (Chad, Rachel) perceived
great move. Not thinking or speaking in the SA peer group as an affordance to
French for three days had a horrible impact learning, and others (Elise, Eric, and Molly)
Monday. I couldn’t get into the groove of perceived it as a constraint; Sam viewed it as
things.’’ Chad and Elise also described lim- both. Interestingly, participants were largely
iting travels in Europe, but it was not clear critical of how their 18 more advanced
whether this was primarily associated with peers treated the smaller intermediate-level
group. According to Molly, they became up the rest of the time I have here and spend
‘‘frustrated’’ by the intermediate group’s time with my family . . . rather than go out
French and ‘‘look[ed] down’’ on them. Sim- some nights or worry or question what ev-
ilarly, Elise said, ‘‘A lot of the time, I feel that eryone else is doing.’’
they are judging me based on my abilities or Conversely, several participants con-
lack thereof as a way to feel better about strued the SA peer group as an affordance.
their own abilities. I am slightly intimidated Whereas Sam voiced disappointment that
by them, but I am doing my best.’’ She also his peers were less motivated to speak
stated that she felt more comfortable trying to French than he had first imagined, he also
speak French around native French speakers stated that time spent with his intermedi-
than with those in the more advanced group. ate-level peers ‘‘greatly enhanced my social
Sam had a different perspective, explaining, confidence. I feel comfortable speaking
French with them, because they are at a
The people who are more advanced tend
similar level of French.’’ Chad and Rachel
to speak less French . . . I’ve heard they
also viewed their peer group positively,
don’t want to isolate the kids who don’t
particularly for the emotional support it
speak as much French, but we actually
provided them. As Chad explained, ‘‘It’s
benefit from their speaking French at a
scary being in a city or country that you
higher level. (emphasis in original)
don’t know, but when you have 25 other
Both Sam and Elise described disap- people going through it, that’s extremely
pointment with their peers’ efforts to speak comforting . . . Without them, I would have
French. In Sam’s words, ‘‘It seems like a felt alone and helpless.’’ He did not see the
wasted opportunity for people to come here group’s using English as their lingua franca
and just speak English the whole time . . . as overly problematic, saying, ‘‘I would
but when you’re with the group, it’s like . . . never have traded the hilariously entertain-
pressure . . . you just speak what they ing English conversations I’ve had with the
speak.’’ According to Elise, even when she other students for the opportunity to im-
repeatedly asked her peers to speak in prove my French a little.’’ Rachel also
French, they did not do so, resulting in her emphasized the ‘‘normalcy’’ her peers gave
‘‘try[ing] to stay away from the other Amer- her, explaining, ‘‘Their presence has helped
ican students.’’ me to see and visit many different things . . .
Besides Elise, two other participants I have gone to Versailles and Mont St.
made efforts to remove themselves from Michel with [Molly] . . . but without her, I
their peers to focus on their own goals, may have been too scared to do a lot of trav-
particularly in the later weeks of SA. As Eric eling on my own.’’ Like Chad, she viewed the
related during week 5, advantages of speaking English with peers
for ‘‘clarify[ing] things I didn’t understand . . .
Being part of this group is exhausting
or vent[ing] about my frustrations’’ as out-
. . . now at the end of the trip I’m tired
weighing French people in restaurants or
of bending for people, and I am cer-
bars being ‘‘less likely to talk to us.’’
tainly ready this weekend and next
The participants’ differing perspectives
week to do only want I want. I’m here
on the role of their peers was clearly re-
for me, not for others . . . I’m ready to
flected in how and with whom they spent
sit down and read and zone out in my
time outside class (see Table 3). Whereas
readings and writings and not be mur-
Chad and Rachel both reported spending
mured about for being too big a dork.
3.5 hours daily with peers, communicating
Molly expressed a comparable senti- in French with them only 25% of the time,
ment in her blog, as she mentioned the other participants (Elise, Eric, Molly,
‘‘withdrawing from others’’ and ‘‘trying to and Sam) claimed to spend almost half that
pull myself away from everyone’’ to ‘‘soak time daily with peersFaveraging 1.88
40
TABLE 3
Participants’ Language Contact During SA
Percentage of
communication Hours spent Hours spent
interacting in interacting with interacting
French outside homestay family in with U.S. SA
class French daily Other non-interactive contact with French peers daily
Chad 25% 1.5 hours music 5–10 minutes daily; televised game shows weekly 3.5 hours
Elise 50% 5.0 hours music 15 minutes daily; televised news, game shows, None
and soccer daily
Eric 50% 2.0 hours novels and nonfiction reading 30 minutes daily; 2.0 hours
journaling 15 minutes daily; music 15 minutes daily
Molly 25% 3.0 hours magazines and cookbooks 1 hour daily; writing notes 2.5 hours
or in her calendar 15 minutes daily; game shows and
televised films 30 minutes daily
Rachel 25% 1.0 hour music 15 minutes daily; magazines less than once 3.5 hours
per week
Sam 95–100% 3.5 hours Newspapers, online news, comics 1 hour 15 minutes 2.0 hours
daily; televised news daily
Spring 2010
hoursFand to communicate with them in mother as a worthy struggle, saying in her

French for half the time. final blog entry,
I’ve always made a big effort to talk, to
understand, to be there, and that how I
Interactions with French Host Families
feel this six weeks has been important
Before SA, participants were generally en-
to me. I’ve always tried to be a part of
thusiastic about the idea of living with a
everything that happened . . . it’s been
French family. Exceptions were Rachel,
hard, but it’s been worth it.
who was ‘‘not sure [she] wanted to stay with
a family’’ but thought ‘‘it would be more However, not all the participants
homey than living in a dorm,’’ and Eric, viewed their host family as an affordance for
who said he would have opted for an apart- learning; several (Chad, Eric, and Rachel)
ment had it been offered yet ‘‘g[o]t the felt their families’ preoccupations kept
feeling it was extremely important’’ to live them from paying sufficient attention to
with a family. Once in France, considerable their own linguistic needs. In each case, the
differences existed in the degree to which participants lived with couples with two or
participants integrated into their families’ three school-age children or college-age
lives and the causes they attributed to the young adults. As Chad described it, ‘‘They
relationships (or lack thereof) that devel- aren’t really even taking the time right now
oped between them and their families. to work with me . . . The problem is that the
Molly, Elise, and Sam each detailed only time they get together to converse is at
their efforts to interact with their host fam- dinner which is also the time I am at
ilies in their blogs (in Molly’s case, a couple the house.’’ Even at SA’s end, he felt ‘‘lost in
with young adult children at home; in Elise the shuffle’’ because they were ‘‘so busy
and Sam’s case, single women with no chil- with themselves.’’ Rachel’s contact was also
dren) and the strong bonds formed. On limited to dinner conversation, as she
average, these participants claimed to spend explained in a week 4 blog:
just over 4 hours daily interacting with
After class, I usually walk around and
homestay family members (see Table 3).
do a little shopping . . . go home and
Even before SA, Molly stated she would
rest for awhile in my room. Then my
need to ‘‘set goals for myself to say, like, ‘I
family calls me for dinner. We usually
have to talk to my family . . . You have to
talk about our plans and what we had
talk to them, don’t shy away. You know this
done earlier that day. After dinner, I go
is what you’re here forFto learn.’’’ In real-
to my room and listen to music and
ity, she did need work at establishing
read until I am ready to go to bed.
communication with them after initial ‘‘dis-
appointment because I don’t converse with Eric, too, lamented his relatively limited
them as much as I want to’’ due to their busy interaction with his hosts, describing the sit-
schedules that she did not always under- uation as having a mother with ‘‘three kids to
stand. By week 2, she figured out the best take care of, a job, and was searching for an
times to talk with them and where to station MBA program, and a father then would come
herself in the house to facilitate conversa- home [from work], she’d serve him . . . mad-
tions. Although she remained in contact ness . . . I really wanted to get more
with her hosts long after SA, even at the interaction.’’ For Chad and Rachel, this lim-
program’s end, she claimed to still ‘‘really ited interaction resulted in them indicating
push myself really hard . . . just as far as that their homestay contact was ‘‘extremely
asking questions and becoming knowl- dissatisf[ying]’’ (Rachel) and ‘‘somewhat
edgeable’’ through conversations with her dissatisf[ying]’’ (Chad) in their Post Study
French family. Elise also spoke of the es- Abroad Questionnaires. In addition, Chad
tablishment of a relationship with her host and Rachel spent less time with their hosts
42 Spring 2010
than othersF1 hour per day in Rachel’s case even more satisfied that I am making
and 1.5 hours for Chad (see Table 3). progress. It’s progress I can see first-
hand! Every day! J’aime parler français!
Research Question 3: Participants’ [I like speaking French!]
Ongoing Language-Learning
Although he had not yet reached his
Motivation and Persistence in Foreign pre-SA goal to engage in conversations in
Language Learning French about abstract matters, he said that
The question of whether participants’ lan- his dinner conversations with his hostess
guage-learning motivation was enhanced were ‘‘relaxed’’ and ‘‘almost like the kinds of
through short-term SA was perhaps the most dinner conversations I have at home.’’ By
important one investigated by this study. To SA’s midpoint, Sam identified himself as
restate an important definition, from an ac- ‘‘the dictionary guy.’’ He explained, ‘‘When I
tivity theory perspective, language-learning am in public listening to people talk on the
motivation results from the alignment of a bus, tram, or in the street, I always have my
learner’s motive and goal with a sense of par- dictionary at hand to look up new words
ticipation in a new community of practice. and phrases.’’ In addition, his peers became
Learner agency, in this view, is critical for both accustomed to seeing him with his dictio-
generating goals and carrying out goal- nary, and they began to approach Sam daily
directed actions to accomplish goals in for definitions of unknown words, which
cooperation with those in the learning envi- helped Sam start ‘‘opening up’’ socially with
ronment. This study’s data suggested that to peers, one of his initial personal goals.
varying degrees, participants initially moti- Two weeks before SA’s end, Sam de-
vated to engage in language learning and to scribed a ‘‘perfect example’’ of how he was
participate in SA for linguistic reasons (Eric, approaching his goal to engage as actively
Elise, Molly, and Sam) did develop more mo- possible in French with ‘‘classmates, my
tivation to continue studying or using French family, and people I encounter on the street’’:
personally through SA. Conversely, those
participants initially motivated to learn A woman at my morning bus stop asked
French and participate in SA for pragmatic me if the bus had already gone by. Rather
reasons (Chad and Rachel) did not enhance than simply telling her it hadn’t, I ex-
their language-learning motivation, viewing it plained to her that it was common for
primarily as a cultural and travel experience. this bus to be between five and 10 min-
Several participants whose language- utes late because of the traffic . . . She
learning motivation grew during SA posited knew I wasn’t exactly French, but that
themselves as active agents of language didn’t matter . . . I was proud of my abil-
learning, making sustained efforts to pursue ity to do it. These are the kinds of
linguistic goals. In certain cases, participants experiences I would like to have more of
described specific episodes in their blogs every day during these last two weeks.
wherein their motivation was enhanced
These instances demonstrate that Sam
through participation in social interactions.
invested considerable energy in communi-
Examples from Sam’s and Molly’s experiences
cating as fully, albeit imperfectly, as possible
abroad are illustrative of this phenomenon.
to instantiate his goal and experienced
Sam overcame an initial inability to
pleasure and pride from participating in
‘‘initiate [his] French personality and star[t]
social interactions. As he explained, ‘‘I cre-
talking to people in French’’ when he met
ated the confidence in my ability to be there
his French host mother in Nantes. In week
and to understand them’’ (emphasis added).
2, he wrote in his blog,
After SA, Sam claimed to be ‘‘extremely sat-
The fact that I am able to get across to isfied’’ with his efforts to speak French and
[her] the gist of my ideas makes me feel the accomplishment of his goals. The result
of Sam’s enhanced language-learning moti- a half. The entire conversation was in

vation was a changed relation to French. French . . . I was sooo happy . . . I already
He stated, reached my once-goal, and I was amazed.
Before I just thought, OK, I did Ger- This interaction showed Molly that she
man, now I’m going to do French, but could reach her goal of engaging in sustained
it’s not like that now. It’s not just being conversations, and her motive to become a
able to read French philosophy, now I’m fluent French speaker was strengthened, im-
more interested in using the language. pelling her to generate new short-term goals.
Before I just wanted to be able to read, By the end of SA, she described being proud
now I want to meet French people and of ‘‘how far I’ve come since I started’’ and said
speak with French people. I like it a lot she was ‘‘satisfied’’ with her efforts to speak
(emphasis added). French and her accomplishment of her goals.
After SA, Sam completed his French Further proof of her enhanced motivation
minor and, unable to take additional courses and confidence occurred in September, when
due to his double major, became a French she changed her major to French. As she
language partner at his university for stu- explained by e-mail, ‘‘I now have the self-
dents in a hybrid online-classroom French esteem to know if there is something I want
course. He worked in that role during two to accomplish, there is nothing holding me
semesters for several hours per week. back . . . I know if I work at it, I can go back
Molly also doubted herself linguistically like I soon intend to do.’’ During the next
before SA but gained tremendous confidence year, she persevered in upper-level literature,
in her capacity to successfully learn French. writing, and cultural studies courses, despite
Her SA experiences, however, were often not her feeling that ‘‘others are far ahead of me’’
‘‘feel-good moments’’ but struggles to partici- since she ‘‘t[ook] pride in being in these
pate in social interactions. During week 2, courses.’’
she described an attempt to buy train tickets Like Sam and Molly, Elise and Eric de-
from a French travel agent as ‘‘Very frustrat- scribed a changed relationship to French
ing . . . for me and [her] . . . there’s no way for after SA. For Elise, who was ‘‘extremely sat-
me to speak if I don’t know what they are isfied’’ with her efforts to speak French and
saying in the first place.’’ But rather than de- her goal accomplishment, she no longer felt
moralizing her, this encounter led to her as she once hadF‘‘Take one more semester,
articulating a new goal: ‘‘To try to compre- get the minor, and be done with French.’’
hend others better’’ and specific ways to After completing her French minor the term
approach itFby listening to her host family after SA, Elise extended her French studies
members while they talked together and in an advanced French conversation course
watching television with her host brother ‘‘for the following spring but was unable to con-
about 30 minutes each night.’’ tinue afterward due to the requirements of
The following week, an encounter in her major and second minor in Asian stud-
the train led to a turning point in her efforts ies. Eric, who was ‘‘satisfied’’ with how his
to become a confident French speaker. In goals were accomplished during SA, ex-
her blog, she wrote, plained how French had changed for him in
his interview after the program:
A young French guy sat next to me, and
he made a comment to me in French, Now it’s like, wow, I can get into this. I
and I just kind of shook my head and can start buying literature and start ap-
laughed, because I didn’t understand plying this knowledge now. That was
what he said. He kept talking to me one thing that was unexpected and just
though, and after a while, I looked at the all of the sudden [sic] you know, I can
clock, and we had talked for an hour and read this stuff and can comprehend this
44 Spring 2010
easier, I can apply these thoughts, these said, ‘‘When I look back . . . I remember all
ideas (emphasis in original). the fun trips and cultural experiences I
had.’’ After the program, Rachel completed
Eric, too, completed his French minor one last course toward her French minor
the term after SA by completing an ad- and then ended her French studies.
vanced writing course. But after an optional Chad, who was ‘‘neither satisfied nor
French cultural studies course the follow- dissatisfied’’ with his efforts to speak French
ing spring, requirements for his double during SA but ‘‘satisfied’’ with his accom-
majors precluded him taking any further plishment of his linguistic goals, also spoke
French courses. A year after SA, he went to about SA’s benefits as primarily cultural,
Argentina, where he taught English as a saying that his experiences abroad ‘‘changed
second language for one academic year. his aspect on the world’’ and caused him to
Not every participant’s language-learning ‘‘feel compelled to visit other countries and
motivation was transformed through SA, as continue to learn about the world.’’ When
Rachel’s experience illustrates. The combina- asked if his relation to French had changed,
tion of little time spent with her host family, he responded, ‘‘I can’t honestly say I fell in
the feeling her hosts were not invested in love with French . . . It was a great experi-
getting to know her, and ongoing communi- ence, but it’s just one culture.’’ Like Rachel,
cative struggles weakened her motivation to he successfully finished his French minor
pursue her linguistic goals. Her blog entry with one further course after SA and thus
from week 4 underscores her profound ended his studies of French.
demotivation and a goal shift:
The first 3 weeks that I was in Nantes
Discussion
I was overwhelmed by the challenges I
faced but had hope that things would Theoretical Implications
get progressively easier with time . . . I Findings reported above demonstrated two
still have difficulty understanding and primary orientations motivating partici-
speaking in French all the time. It is very pants to learn French at the college level:
tiring for me. As for my host family . . . linguistic motives and career-oriented mo-
we have very little interaction, and they tives. Moreover, the choice to study abroad
seem content to keep it that way. I am was seen as either a critical step in achiev-
no longer very optimistic that I will get ing linguistic goals or a means of traveling
to know my family better . . . With 2 and learning about culture. Enhanced lan-
weeks left in Nantes I want to do some guage-learning motivation and persistence
more traveling . . . I also hope to explore to continue studying or using French
more in Nantes. I’d like to visit a mu- emerged for participants viewing SA as a
seum or go to a different park . . . I want linguistic experience and a step toward
to experience more of the culture in achieving personal linguistic goals but not
France as well. for those with primarily pragmatic reasons
for studying French or participating in SA.
At SA’s end, Rachel said she was ‘‘nei- From an activity theory perspective,
ther satisfied nor dissatisfied’’ with her delving into the reasons informing students’
efforts to speak French, ‘‘somewhat dissat- choices to learn French, earn a French mi-
isfied’’ with her progress toward linguistic nor or an International Business certificate,
goals, and ‘‘somewhat dissatisfied’’ with her or participate in summer SA help research-
accomplishment of her cultural goals due to ers better understand their linguistic
her negative host family experiences. She choices and behaviors abroad and why they
called ‘‘learn[ing] to travel and experience spend (or fail to spend) time and effort
new places’’ the most rewarding aspect of interacting with American peers, French
SA and when reflecting on her experiences hosts, or others in their learning environ-
ment. Through analyzing SA participants’ the next few weeks will help me’’ or ‘‘with
language-learning motives, goals for SA, time my grammar will improve’’), and
means of pursuing goals, and motivational blamed limited interaction with French
trajectories, one realizes that it is impossi- people on others.
ble to view motivation as a stable, internal The types of initial goals that partici-
characteristic of individuals or to see stu- pants articulated and their ongoing capacity
dents as possessing either ‘‘low’’ or ‘‘high’’ to set related subgoals during SA influenced
motivation. what learning behaviors, or actions, were
Rather, one might conclude that some ‘‘maximized and selected and how they
SA participants like Molly and Sam possess [were] operationalized’’ during SA (Donato,
social motives (i.e., to communicate with 1994, p. 36). When participants posited spe-
others) and higher-level cognitive motives cific, real-life learning targets like ‘‘holding at
(i.e., arising from an intrinsic interest to least 20- or 30-minute conversations’’ in
learn something as an end in and of itself) French or being comprehensible in service
whereas other participants like Chad and encounters, they reflected on and benefited
Rachel are oriented by lower-level cognitive from successful linguistic interactions and,
motives (i.e., learning something with the ultimately, enhanced their language-learning
goal of obtaining a result, such as earning a motivation. On the other hand, holding un-
French minor) (Lompscher, 1999). With focused goals like ‘‘improve my speaking’’ or
earning a French minor rather than achiev- ‘‘improve my accent’’ and not articulating
ing French fluency as the object orienting clear learning targets was associated with less
some participants’ engagement in language satisfaction with the accomplishment of lin-
learning, it is, in the end, unsurprising that guistic goals. Moreover, the fact that most
their linguistic motivation was not enhanced participants’ initial goals were quite vague
during SA. Phrased in activity theory terms, and that some participants never articulated
this can be explained by a lack of alignment concrete subgoals may indicate that the fre-
of motive and goal combined with an inabil- quently discussed myth of foreign language
ity to achieve meaningful participation in development abroad occurring through a
their new community of practice. In Chad’s sort of ‘‘osmosis’’ does, in fact, inform how
and Rachel’s case, this was demonstrated not some SA participants approach language
only through their expressed motives and learning and may negatively impact linguistic
goals but also in terms of how relatively little development.
time they spent interacting in French in A final theoretical implication derives
comparison to time spent interacting with from this study’s findings regarding the dy-
American peers in English. namic nature of language-learning motivation
This study’s findings confirmed the no- based on factors both internal to individual
tion that students’ capacity for self- learners, such as self-regulatory strategies,
regulation exerts a powerful influence on and external to learners, such as relationships
how they engage in language learning and established in cooperation with French
what they achieve (Gillette, 1994; Mills et speakers or SA peers. Findings demonstrating
al., 2007). In general terms, agency played divergent motivational and linguistic trajec-
an important role in whether participants tories for this study’s participants contradict
judged their SA learning experiences as the assumption that SA as a context generates
successful and if their language-learning transformative learning, an implicit assump-
motivation was enhanced. Whereas some tion in much research. Instead, this study
participants regulated their language learn- offers support for a relational definition of SA
ing through effective goal-setting and as a learning context: That is to say, by using
positive self-talk, others assumed less re- the conceptual lens of activity theory, context
sponsibility for their learning, privileged can be understood as emergent from students’
the notion of time over effort (e.g., ‘‘I hope motives, goals, and resultant actions. Context
46 Spring 2010
is not, as Nardi (1996) described, just ‘‘out intervene in communities of practice’’ to help
there’’ but varies and is dependent on the in- people participate in learning activity as fully
terplay of learner and community, learner as possible (2001, p. 157). Accordingly, I
intentions vs. those in his or her community support the notion of intervention in SA,
of practice. For SA participants, faculty, and particularly for short-term programs, be-
program administrators, the clear implication cause of their current popularity among U.S.
of viewing context in such a way could be students and based on limited existing liter-
summarized as follows: How one regulates ature on best practices in program design.
and engages in language-learning activity Intervening in SA learning experiences could
during SA generates the context rather than take any number of forms, one of which, re-
the context generating learning. flective blogging, was illustrated in this study.
However, it is evident from this study’s find-
ings that blogging in the absence of other
Pedagogical Implications forms of mediation is not sufficient to trans-
In terms of this study’s practical implications, form learning outcomes. Another form of
it is evident that foreign language students intervention to be explored is the implemen-
have varied reasons for learning a foreign tation of differentiated instruction, or a
language and choosing to participate in SA. curriculum that takes into account not just
In the SA cohort investigated in this study, students’ incoming foreign language levels
some participants’ motives, goals, and learn- but also their personal goals for linguistic
ing behaviors facilitated language learning and cultural learning. Such an instructional
whereas others did not. For anyone who has approach would entail little time spent
taught in or directed SA programs, interest- learning the foreign language from behind a
ing differences in participants’ attitudes and desk during SA but would, instead, comprise
behaviors often emerge once they are abroad student-centered planning and execution of
and experience the academic, communica- tasks requiring structured interaction with
tive, cultural, and social demands of daily life cultural informants. Students would later
in a foreign country. Some students do not create task completion reports in the foreign
adapt well to learning conditions beyond the language and reflect on how language use
foreign language classroom despite years of enabled or constrained participation in the
previous study and, in many cases, stellar task. The classroom would serve as a site for
grades in the foreign language studied. As task planning and, later, sharing and com-
Vande Berg (2007) explained, some SA par- paring results among groups of students.
ticipants are ‘‘admirably self-sufficient’’ Language, rather than an end in and of itself,
whereas others ‘‘simply do not know how to to be memorized or mastered, would func-
go about learning in a new and different cul- tion as a tool for interaction and reflection.
tural environment’’ (p. 394). Whereas future research efforts are critically
This study presents a compelling, the- needed to both describe and investigate the
ory-driven explanation for how and why effects of intervention in SA, the incorpora-
some students’ language-learning motivation of reflective blogging and differentiated
tion is enhanced during SA while other instruction would be valuable steps in im-
students experience demotivation. But be- proving the curricula of short-term SA and in
yond merely explaining motivational maximizing participants’ participation in
phenomena, this study makes researchers their communities of practice abroad.
consider a critical question: How can short-
term SA programs structure learning expe-
riences for students with varied motives, Acknowledgments
goals, and means of pursuing their goals? This study was funded by grants from the
As Lantolf and Pavlenko explained, ac- University Center for International Studies
tivity theory ‘‘compels the researcher to at the University of Pittsburgh and the
College of Arts and Sciences at the University language research (pp. 33–56). Norwood, NJ:
of Miami. I am also grateful to Richard Do- Ablex.
nato for his invaluable ongoing insights Dörnyei, Z. (2001). Teaching and researching
related to this study and to Martha Witman motivation. Harlow, UK: Longman.
for her assistance with data management. Dörnyei, Z. (2003). Attitudes, orientations, and
Finally, I thank the three anonymous review- motivations in language learning: Advances in
ers of the first version of this article for their theory, research, and applications. Malden, MA:
excellent suggestions for revision; any fur- Blackwell.
ther errors or oversights are entirely my own. Dörnyei, Z. (2005). The psychology of the lan-
guage learner: Individual differences in second
language acquisition. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
References
Dörnyei, Z., & Ottó, I. (1998). Motivation in
Allen, H. W. (2002). Does study abroad make action: A process model of L2 motivation.
a difference? A study of motivational and Working Papers in Applied Linguistics (Thames
linguistic outcomes (Doctoral dissertation, Valley University Working Papers, Vol. 4).
Emory University, 2002). Dissertation Abstracts London: Thames Valley University.
International, 63, 1279.
Douglass, K. (2007). From the learner’s per-
Allen, H. W., & Herron, C. A. (2003). A mixed spective: A case study on motives and study
methodology investigation of the linguistic abroad. In S. Wilkinson (Ed.), AAUSC issues
and affective outcomes of summer study in language program direction: Insights from
abroad. Foreign Language Annals, 36, study abroad for language programs (pp. 116–
370–384. 132). Boston: Heinle.
Baker, S. C., & MacIntyre, P. D. (2003). The Dwyer, M. M. (2004). More is better: The im-
role of gender and immersion in communica- pact of study abroad program duration.
tion and second language orientations. Frontiers: The Interdisciplinary Journal of Study
Language Learning, 53, 65–96. Abroad, 10, 151–163.
Bernhaus, M., Moore, E., & Azevedo, A. C. Engeström, Y. (1999). Activity theory and in-
(2007). Affective factors influencing plurilin- dividual and social transformation. In Y.
gual acquisition of Catalan in a Catalan- Engeström, R. Miettinen, & R.-L. Punamäki
Spanish bilingual context. Modern Language (Eds.), Perspectives on activity theory (pp. 19–
Journal, 91, 235–246. 38). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bonney, C. R., Cortina, K. S., Smith-Darden, J.
Freed, B. F. (1990). Language learning in a
P., & Fiori, K. L. (2008). Understanding strat-
study abroad context: The effects of interac-
egies in foreign language learning: Are
tive and non-interactive out-of-class contact
integrative and intrinsic motives distinct pre-
on grammatical achievement and oral profi-
dictors? Learning and Individual Differences,
ciency. In J. Atlantis (Ed.), Linguistic, language
18, 1–10.
teaching and language acquisition: The interde-
Churchill, E., & DuFon, M. A. (2006). Evolv- pendence of theory, practice and research (pp.
ing threads in study abroad research. In M. A. 459–477). Washington, DC: Georgetown
DuFon & E. Churchill (Eds.), Language University Press.
learners in study abroad contexts (pp. 1–27).
Freed, B. F., Segalowitz, N., & Dewey, D. P.
Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.
(2004). Context of learning and second lan-
Creswell, J. W. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and guage fluency in French. Studies in Second
research design. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Language Acquisition, 26, 275–311.
Crookes, G., & Schmidt, R. W. (1991). Moti- Gardner, R. C. (1985). Social psychology and
vation: Reopening the research agenda. second language learning: The role of attitudes
Language Learning, 41, 469–512. and motivation. London: Edward Arnold.
Davidson, D. E. (2007). Study abroad and Gillette, B. (1994). The role of learner goals in
outcomes measurements: The case of Russian. L2 success. In J. P. Lantolf & G. Appel (Eds.),
Modern Language Journal, 91, 276–280. Vygotskian approaches to second language ac-
quisition (pp. 195–213). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Donato, R. (1994). Collective scaffolding in
second language learning. In J. P. Lantolf & G. Iino, M. (2006). Norms of interaction in a
Appel (Eds.), Vygotskian approaches to second Japanese homestay setting: Toward two-way
48 Spring 2010
flow of linguistic and cultural resources. In M. language development. Oxford: Oxford Uni-
A. DuFon & E. Churchill (Eds.), Language versity Press.
learners in study abroad contexts (pp. 151–
173). Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learn-
ing: Legitimate peripheral participation.
Ingram, M. (2005). Recasting the foreign lan- Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
guage requirement through study abroad: A
Leont’ev, A. N. (1978). Activity, consciousness,
cultural immersion program in Avignon. For-
and personality. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice
eign Language Annals, 38, 211–222.
Hall.
Institute of International Education. (2008).
Open doors: Report on international educational Leont’ev, A. N. (1981). Problems of the devel-
exchange. Retrieved November 17, 2008, from opment of the mind. Moscow: Progress.
http://opendoors.iienetwork.org/ Lewis, T. L., & Niesenbaum, R. A. (2005).
Kim, T.-Y. (2007). Second language learning Extending the stay: Using community-based
motivation from an activity theory perspective: research and service learning to enhance
Longitudinal case studies of Korean ESL students short-term study abroad. Journal of Studies in
and recent immigrants in Toronto (Doctoral International Education, 9, 251–264.
dissertation, University of Toronto, 2007). Dis- Lompscher, J. (1999). Motivation and activity.
sertation Abstracts International, A68-06. European Journal of Psychology of Education,
Kinginger, C. (2004). Alice doesn’t live here 14, 11–22.
anymore: Foreign language learning and MacIntyre, P. D. (2007). Willingness to com-
identity reconstruction. In A. Pavlenko & A. municate in the second language:
Blackledge (Eds.), Negotiation of identities in Understanding the decision to speak as a vo-
multilingual contexts (pp. 219–242). Cleve- litional process. Modern Language Journal, 91,
don, UK: Multilingual Matters. 564–576.
Kinginger, C. (2008). Language learning in Magnan, S. S., & Back, M. (2007). Social in-
study abroad: Case histories of Americans in teraction and linguistic gain during study
France (Modern Language Journal Monograph abroad. Foreign Language Annals, 40, 43–61.
Series, Vol. 1). Oxford: Blackwell.
Markova, A. K. (1990). Ways of investigating
Koester, J. (1985). A profile of the U.S. student motivation for learning in school children.
abroad. New York: Council on International Soviet Psychology, 28, 21–42.
Educational Exchange.
McDonough, S. K. (2001). Promoting self-
Lantolf, J. P. (2000). Sociocultural theory and regulation in foreign language learners. The
second language learning. Oxford: Oxford Clearing House, 74, 323–326.
University Press.
Mills, N., Pajares, F., & Herron, C. (2007).
Lantolf, J. P. (2004). Sociocultural theory and Self-efficacy of college intermediate French
second language and foreign language learn- students: Relation to achievement and moti-
ing: An overview of sociocultural theory. In K. vation. Language Learning, 57, 417–442.
Van Esch & O. St. John (Eds.), New insights
into foreign language learning and teaching (pp. Nardi, B. A. (1996). Studying context: A
13–34). Frankfurt: Peter Lang. comparison of activity theory, situated action
models, and distributed cognition. In B. A.
Lantolf, J. P., & Appel, G. (1994). Theoretical Nardi (Ed.), Context and consciousness: Activ-
framework: An introduction to Vygotskian ity theory and human-computer interaction (pp.
approaches to second language research. In J. 69–102). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
P. Lantolf & G. Appel (Eds.), Vygotskian ap-
proaches to second language acquisition (pp. 1– Noels, K. A. (2003). Learning Spanish as a
28). Norwood, NJ: Ablex. second language: Learners’ orientations and
perceptions of their teachers’ communication
Lantolf, J. P., & Pavlenko, A. (2001). (S)econd style. Language Learning, 53, 97–136.
(L)anguage (A)ctivity theory: Understanding
second language learners as people. In M. Noels, K. A. (2005). Orientations to learning
Breen (Ed.), Learner contributions to language German: Heritage language background and
learning: New directions in research (pp. 141– motivational processes. Canadian Modern
158). London: Longman. Language Review, 62, 285–312.
Lantolf, J. P., & Thorne, S. L. (2006). Socio- Oxford, R. L., & Shearin, J. (1994). Language
cultural theory and the genesis of second learning motivation: Expanding the theoreti-
cal framework. Modern Language Journal, 78, curriculum and assessment (pp. 5–24). Dublin:
12–28. Authentik.
Pavlenko, A., & Lantolf, J. P. (2000). Second Ushioda, E. (2008). Motivation and good lan-
language learning as participation and the guage learners. In C. Griffiths (Ed.), Lessons
(re)construction of selves. In J. P. Lantolf from good language learners (pp. 19–34).
(Ed.), Sociocultural theory and second language Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
learning (pp. 155–177). Oxford: Oxford Uni-
versity Press. Vande Berg, M. (2007). Intervening in the
learning of U.S. students abroad. Journal of
Polanyi, L. (1995). Language learning and Studies in International Education, 11, 392–
living abroad: Stories from the field. In 399.
B. F. Freed (Ed.), Second language acquisition
in a study abroad context (pp. 271–291). Vandergrift, L. (2005). Relationships among
Amsterdam: John Benjamins. motivation orientations, metacognitive aware-
ness and proficiency in L2 listening. Applied
Siegal, M. (1995). Individual differences and Linguistics, 26, 70–89.
study abroad: Women learning Japanese in Ja-
pan. In B. F. Freed (Ed.), Second language Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The
acquisition in a study abroad context (pp. 225– development of higher psychological processes.
243). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Simões, A. R. M. (1996). Phonetics in second Wilkinson, S. (1998). Study abroad from the
language acquisition: An acoustic study of participants’ perspectives: A challenge to
fluency in adult learners of Spanish. Hispania, common beliefs. Foreign Language Annals, 31,
79, 87–95. 23–39.
Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of Wilkinson, S. (2000). Emerging questions
qualitative research: Grounded theory proce- about study abroad. ADFL Bulletin, 32, 36–41.
dures and techniques. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Williams, M. (2004). Motivation in foreign
Ushioda, E. (2007). Motivation, autonomy language learning. In M. Baynham, A. Deig-
and sociocultural theory. In D. Little, J. Ridley, nan, & G. White (Eds.), Applied linguistics at
& E. Ushioda (Eds.), Learner autonomy in the the interface (pp. 167–180). London: British
foreign language classroom: Teacher, learner, Association for Applied Linguistics.

Foreign Language Annals - 2010 - Allen - Language Learning Motivation During Short Term Study Abroad An Activity Theory

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Foreign Language Annals - 2010 - Allen - Language Learning Motivation During Short Term Study Abroad An Activity Theory

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Foreign Language Annals vol. 43, No.

Abstract: This study investigated the development of language-learning motivation

Heather Willis Allen (PhD, Emory University) is Assistant Professor of Second

Ushioda (2008), both of these motivations An Activity-Theoretic Approach to

Need + Object Motive + Goal + Participation Motivation

Source: Kim, 2007

Pseudonym / Age / Year in Academic Previous Study

Linguistic Goals Cultural Goals Social Goals

Linguistic Goals Cultural Goals Social Goals

establish concrete subgoals to instantiate conversations’’ in French, what she saw as

hoursFand to communicate with them in mother as a worthy struggle, saying in her

of Sam’s enhanced language-learning moti- a half. The entire conversation was in

You might also like