Language learning outside of the classroom

Walden University
COLLEGE OF EDUCATION
This is to certify that the dissertation by
Cheryl Murray
has been found to be complete and satisfactory in all respects,
and that any and all revisions required by
the review committee have been made.
Review Committee
Dr. Glenn Ayres, Committee Chairperson, Education Faculty
Dr. Amie Beckett, Committee Member, Education Faculty
Dr. Thomas Cavanagh, University Reviewer, Education Faculty
Chief Academic Officer
David Clinefelter, Ph.D.
Walden University
2010

Abstract
Language learning Outside of the Classroom: A Reflection on Language Learner
Complexity
by
Cheryl Ann Murray
MA, University of South Carolina, 2004
BA, University of Florida, 1974
Doctoral Study Submitted in Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements for the Degree of
Doctor of Philosophy
Walden University
November 2010

Abstract
International students attending English language schools are routinely offered the choice
of a full-day intensive program or a semi-intensive program featuring time off to use
English in the local area. Utilizing Bensons’ theory about learning outside the classroom,
this narrative inquiry study researched the beliefs of English learners with regard to
having additional free time outside the classroom. Purposive sampling was used to select
10 adult English language students in the southeastern United States. Participants’
experiences were elicited through semi-structured interviews and constructed into
narratives, validated by member checking. The narratives were analyzed using polyvocal
analysis, followed by a cross-narrative analysis and triangulation with other interview
data. The findings showed that having additional time did not automatically enhance
language learning. Whether language learning occurred depended on the participants
themselves and their choice of living arrangements. Participants who created
opportunities for engagement with native speakers perceived their language learning to
be particularly successful. Homestay accommodations with an English-speaking host
family emerged as the option most conducive to language learning outside of the
classroom. These findings may help learners, instructors, and support staff of English
language schools to recognize and create opportunities for out-of-classroom language
learning. Augmenting formal programs of instruction for English learners with effective,
out-of-classroom language learning opportunities such as homestays with English-
speaking host families could contribute to greater student success in English language
learning. As a result these students will be better able to assimilate into American culture.

Language Learning Outside of the Classroom: A Reflection on Language Learner
Complexity
by
Cheryl Ann Murray
MA, University of South Carolina, 2004
BA, University of Florida, 1974
Doctoral Study Submitted in Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements for the Degree of
Doctor of Philosophy
Walden University
November 2010

UMI Number: 3422367
All rights reserved
INFORMATION TO ALL USERS
The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted.
In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript
and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed,
a note will indicate the deletion.
UMI 3422367
Copyright 2010 by ProQuest LLC.
All rights reserved. This edition of the work is protected against
unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code.
ProQuest LLC
789 East Eisenhower Parkway
P.O. Box 1346
Ann Arbor, MI 48106-1346

Acknowledgments
I would like to thank my faculty mentor and committee chair, Dr. Glenn Ayres,
for his adept direction and support throughout my entire doctoral program. I am also
deeply grateful for the encouragement and assistance of my committee member, Dr.
Amie Beckett, both during my doctoral program and the dissertation process. I very
much appreciate as well the expert guidance provided by Dr. Tom Cavanagh, the Walden
University Research Reviewer (URR) who reviewed my proposal and dissertation. I
would also like to express my gratitude to the ELS administration who allowed me the
opportunity to conduct my study and to the ELS students who volunteered to participate.
I wish to thank a fellow doctoral student and friend, Yu Jeong Choi, who offered
an excellent peer review of my dissertation. Finally, I would like to thank my team for
the years of unwavering support during this process: my mother, Virginia Hill; my
husband, Jonathan Murray; and my daughters, Alison and Andrea Fitzgerald.

i
Table of Contents
List of Tables .......................................................................................................................v
List of Figures.................................................................................................................... vi
Chapter 1: Introduction to the Study....................................................................................1
Statement of the Problem...............................................................................................3
Nature of the Study........................................................................................................3
Research Questions........................................................................................................5
Purpose of the Study......................................................................................................7
Conceptual Framework..................................................................................................8
Definitions of Terms......................................................................................................9
Assumptions.................................................................................................................10
Scope, Delimitations, and Limitations.........................................................................11
Significance of the Study.............................................................................................12
Summary......................................................................................................................13
Chapter 2: Literature Review.............................................................................................16
Language Learner Autonomy ......................................................................................17
21st Century Views............................................................................................... 18
Out-of-Classroom Learning.................................................................................. 19
Study Abroad ...............................................................................................................30
Learner Factors Associated with Autonomy................................................................34
The Learner’s Role ............................................................................................... 37
Motivation and Autonomy.................................................................................... 40

ii
Language Learning Strategies............................................................................... 42
First Culture and Language Influence................................................................... 45
Individual Learner Characteristics........................................................................ 48
Literature Related to the Methodology........................................................................50
Summary......................................................................................................................56
Chapter 3: Research Method..............................................................................................58
Research Design...........................................................................................................58
Research Paradigm and Strategy for Investigation............................................... 58
Role of the Researcher.......................................................................................... 60
Research Questions............................................................................................... 61
Sampling Procedure.....................................................................................................67
Instrumentation ............................................................................................................67
Interviews.............................................................................................................. 67
Data Analysis........................................................................................................ 68
Ethical Protection of the Participants...........................................................................69
Pilot Study....................................................................................................................70
Summary......................................................................................................................72
Chapter 4: Results..............................................................................................................74
Collection and Treatment of the Data..........................................................................74
Participant Narratives...................................................................................................76
Participant 1 .......................................................................................................... 76
Participant 2 .......................................................................................................... 80

iii
Participant 3 .......................................................................................................... 82
Participant 4 .......................................................................................................... 85
Participant 5 .......................................................................................................... 87
Participant 6 .......................................................................................................... 88
Participant 7 .......................................................................................................... 90
Participant 8 .......................................................................................................... 92
Participant 9 .......................................................................................................... 95
Participant 10 ........................................................................................................ 97
Pilot study participants.......................................................................................... 99
Cross Narrative Analysis ...........................................................................................101
Research Question One....................................................................................... 102
Research Question Two...................................................................................... 109
Analysis of Data From Other Sources .......................................................................116
Student Activities................................................................................................ 116
Homestay ............................................................................................................ 118
Comments on Findings ..............................................................................................119
Evidence of Quality ...................................................................................................123
Summary of Findings.................................................................................................124
Chapter 5: Discussion, Conclusions, and Recommendations..........................................126
Interpretation of Findings ..........................................................................................127
Implications for Social Change..................................................................................136
Recommendations for Action ....................................................................................140

iv
Recommendations for Further Study.........................................................................142
Reflections of the Researcher ....................................................................................144
Conclusion .................................................................................................................145
References........................................................................................................................147
Appendix A: Individual Interview questions...................................................................165
Appendix B: Consent Form .............................................................................................166
Appendix C: Sample pages of the transcript of the initial interview with Gustavo ........169
Curriculum Vitae .............................................................................................................178

v
List of Tables
Table 1. ELS Curriculum levels........................................................................................ 63
Table 2. Demographics of participants at ELS…………………………………………..74

vi
List of Figures
Figure 1. Current program distribution at ELS..................................................................60
Figure 2. Demographics of ELS, Charlotte Students.........................................................62

1
Chapter 1: Introduction to the Study
English dominates the world as no language ever has, and it is likely that it will
continue to do so for some time (Graddol, 2003). Although there may be more native
speakers of other languages in sheer numbers, English is the common language of
business, science, academia, communications, aviation, the Internet, entertainment, and
diplomacy. For most English language students, the English language is crucial to a
more secure and possibly more fulfilling future (Svalberg, 2009). The expediency of
knowing English for education and employment serves as the motivation for considerable
parental pressure on children to acquire English skills (Jeon, 2010), although this stress
on learning the language may result in some learners studying English reluctantly (Cheng
& Fox, 2008).
The teaching of English has become a multibillion-dollar industry, and it is
estimated nearly one-third of the world's population will soon be studying English
(Graddol, 2006), with an estimated one billion people around the world currently learning
it (Camenson, 2007). Ellis (2008) suggested that:
English is no longer a language spoken primarily as an L1 (first language). The
375 million English as a native language (ENL) speakers are in a very definite
minority compared to the 750 million English as a foreign language (EFL) and
375 million English as a second language (ESL) speakers. (p. 239)
English language programs taught by native English speakers are widely available
worldwide, as are authentic English language materials such as on the Internet and in
print (Camenson, 2007). Although much of the English language learning worldwide is

2
occurring in nonnative English-speaking countries, many students choose to attend
English language programs abroad, including in the United States. English learners
going abroad presumably believe they will enhance their learning through immersion in
an English-speaking community.
English language schools in the U.S. offer ongoing, short (generally month-long)
programs that draw young adults and older students from all parts of the world. Students
attending some American English language schools are offered the choice of an intensive
all-day program or a semi-intensive program in which they have afternoons off to explore
the local area and practice their English through interaction. This opportunity for
freedom in learning the language entails substantive language learner autonomy, which
often presents a challenge for some students, although not for all (Benson & Gao, 2008;
Cotterall, 2008; Murray & Kojima, 2007; Palfreyman, 2003). A detailed discussion of
the literature concerning language learner autonomy as well as the many aspects of
language learning that may work in concert with it is presented in Chapter 2.
There exists limited qualitative research addressing the out-of-classroom language
learning that occurs in juxtaposition to classroom instruction. This study addresses a gap
in the knowledge regarding this facet of language learning autonomy by exploring and
describing what language learners do on their own to augment what they are learning
during a formal course of instruction. As English learning both in and out of the
classroom is expected to increase consistently as a result of globalization, understanding
the complexity of out-of-classroom language learning is especially important.

3
Statement of the Problem
In this qualitative study using narrative inquiry, I interviewed ten English
language learners who were attending programs at a private English language school on a
university campus in the southeastern United States to understand if and how their out-of-
classroom activities and interactions enhance their English language learning and
complement what they are learning in their formal course of instruction.
Both the students and administrative staff of American English language schools
need to understand what is entailed in the selection of a semi-intensive option, as opposed
to the selection of a full-day English course of instruction. Although additional time to
learn English has been assumed to enhance English language learning, the results of this
study suggested such enhancement was not guaranteed. The opportunity for language
learner autonomy presented a challenge for some participants for a variety of reasons,
such their first culture, personality, or choice of housing. At the same time, some
participants thrived in this type of situation and effectively created opportunities for
interaction with native speakers. This study explored these challenges and how the
learners addressed them. It also revealed the strategies and achievements of learners who
were successfully enhancing their English language learning through out-of-classroom
language learning.
Nature of the Study
Through narrative inquiry, I explored the complex nature of English language
learning in an immersion setting with its attendant free time component capturing the
perspectives of ten English language learners. The participants were students attending a

4
private English language school (the ELS Language Center at Queens University,
Charlotte, North Carolina), part of a national network of more than 50 private English
language schools, most of which are located on college campuses. The data collection in
this qualitative study was effected through audio-recorded, semistructured individual
interviews. While conducting the interviews, I began to analyze data on an informal
basis as suggested by Hatch (2002) as during the interview process, decisions are made
on what to probe and explore. I used what Hatch (2002) calls “polyvocal” analysis as my
data analysis strategy for the formal analysis of the data, a framework that is compatible
with narrative inquiry (pp. 201-207).
In a dissertation where the purpose is to hear and analyze participants’
experiences and to identify out-of-classroom learning issues through their stories, it was
appropriate to use a research method that employed face-to-face communication.
Narrative inquiry is a research orientation targeting narratives as a path to studying
experience or some other aspect of being human. Meaning can be present in the stories
people live and relate. Although the use of stories is not new by any means, the recent
increase in the use of narrative methodologies in the field of social sciences has
stimulated thinking about how stories of experiences influence and are influenced by our
lives (Clandinin, 2007).
Narrative inquiry can be differentiated from other methods by the focus on stories
and narratives. Narratives are appropriate for recognizing experiences, either from the
perspective of participants (emic perspective) or from the perspective of an outsider
interpreting individual, institutional, or societal narratives (etic perspective). A

5
researcher may choose narrative inquiry as a means to gain material on a topic, using in-
depth interviews and subsequently analyzing the data collected. Georgakopoulou (2007)
put forth the case for the underrepresented narrative data she called “small stories - that
is, the telling of ongoing events, future or hypothetical events, shared (common) events,
the content of which is considerably less than a full narrative” (p. 145). Similarly,
Tannen (2008) described “small-n narratives” obtained during interviews as “accounts of
specific events and interactions” that participants had revealed to her (p. 209).
This study captured language learning events and opportunities taken and missed
(most of which were reflected in small stories) as well as those aspects of language
learning life stories that were applicable. The goal was to capture the lived experiences
of English language learners during their study abroad at a language school and to
provide insight into the learning process that occurs outside of the classroom. As the
researcher, I coconstructed the narratives in the sense described by a number of scholars
writing about narrative inquiry or narrative research (Clandinin & Connelly, 2000;
Coulter & Smith, 2009; Hatch, 2002; Riessman & Speedy, 2007; Van Maanen, 1988). A
more detailed discussion of how narrative inquiry was implemented is presented in
Chapter 3.
Research Questions
Two central research questions guided this study. Each central question includes
a set of subquestions that contributed to understanding the experience and perceptions of
English language learners. The questions were as follows:

6
1. What are the experiences of English language learners in the semi-intensive program
with regard to the enhanced additional free time during the immersion experience?
• How do English language learners use this free time to develop their English
language proficiency?
• Does the individual’s linguistic or cultural background affect the extent to which
and the way in which free time is used?
• What out-of-classroom language-learning strategies do the students use? Do
students believe they are effective?
• How do the students’ perceptions of their personality affect their ability to take
advantage of out-of-class learning opportunities?
2. Do English language learners in the semi-intensive program believe that their English
language learning is enhanced by having additional free time during their immersion
experience?
• What are the perceptions of students with regard to their own roles in out-of-
classroom language learning?
• What are the impediments to out-of-classroom language learning?
• Why did the students choose the semi-intensive option? Would they choose it
again and if yes, why? Could there be other reasons students choose the semi-
intensive option such as seeking interaction with native speakers to explore the
culture or a reluctance to work as hard as is required with the intensive option?
• To what extent and in what way do the students perceive their in-class activities
prepare them for out-of-class encounters?

7
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study was to determine the means by and the extent to which
students believed that their English language learning was furthered by having the
additional free time during their immersion experience offered by the semi-intensive
option. The study explored how the learners used this free time to develop their English
language proficiency and how individual or cultural differences may have affected the
extent to and the way in which free time was used. The study examined how learners
made use of informal opportunities outside the formal classroom to develop their English
language ability, while considering the learning environment and other factors in this
complex system,. Looking at the problem from the perspective of English language
learners was instructive in understanding their immersion experience. Identifying and
sharing positive learner behaviors that demonstrated autonomy in English language
learning offers insight to both learners and instructors. Uncovering and conveying
tendencies that were antithetical to such productive activities will also be of value to
those reading this study. Based on the results of this study, educators could devise some
structured learning opportunities in the field to prepare students for the time they will be
on their own with native speakers. Scrutinizing the student responses from this research
will help educators and administrators better understand the types of contexts and
situations that might prove problematic outside the classroom, and they could plan
accordingly.

8
Conceptual Framework
Qualitative research as elicited through narrative inquiry reaches into the lived
experiences of the research participants, and such inquiry best fits the purpose of this
study. This study probed the essence of the students' experiences in the immersion
environment to extract the language learner behaviors and strategies that enable second
language acquisition with respect to out-of-classroom learning. Narrative inquiry was
well suited for this study because the aim was to understand how the learners in this study
understood and experienced their out-of-classroom language learning.
Benson (2001) defined out-of-classroom learning as any type of learning that
occurs outside the classroom which includes "self-instruction, naturalistic learning or
self-directed naturalistic learning" (p. 62). Out-of-classroom language learning occurs
during a learner’s free time and while engaging in non-assignment activities that learners
do when they are outside of formal classroom setting with or without the intention to
learn or practice English. Some examples include conversing with native speakers or
friends in English, watching movies or television in English, reading in English, using
English on the computer, and listening to music sung in English.
Learner autonomy and motivation and in second language learning (both in and
out of the classroom) have recently been considered to represent complex constructs that
reflect the interaction of a number of factors. Exploring the complexity of language
learning, specifically out-of-classroom learning, by considering how these factors act
separately and interrelate has enabled the research to reflect an understanding of the

9
many intricacies involved in second language learning (Bunts-Anderson, 2004;
Chusanachoti, 2009).
Definitions of Terms
Academic proficiency: Language in its primary and written form, used in an educational
context (Cummins, 2000).
Conversational proficiency: Fluency in using the language communicatively in face-to-
face interaction, supported by intonation and nonverbal clues (Cummins, 2000).
Emic perspective: The insiders perspective; includes the meanings and views of the
people being studied (Johnson & Christensen, 2004)
Etic perspective: The perspective of the objective researcher studying a group of people
(Johnson & Christensen, 2004)
ESL: English as a second language, taught in countries (such as the US, the UK, or India)
where English is a major language of commerce and education, a language that students
often hear outside the walls of their classroom (Brown, 2001).
EFL: English as a foreign language, specifically English taught in countries (such as
Japan, Egypt, or Venezuela) where English is not a major language of commerce and
education (Brown, 2001).
L1: An individual’s first language (Brown, 2001).
L2, L3: Second or subsequent languages acquired or studied by an individual (Brown,
2001).
Language-learning strategies: “Activities consciously chosen by learners for the purpose
of regulating their own language learning” (Griffiths, 2008a, p. 87).

10
Metacognition: The ability to reflect critically on and evaluate what is known, which in
language learning may enable autonomous and conscious decisions regarding the
learning process (Anderson, 2008).
Out-of-classroom language learning (also called out-of-class language learning): Any
type of learning that occurs outside the classroom (Benson, 2001).
Pragmatic awareness: Involves knowledge of the rules and conventions underlying
appropriate language use in communicative situations (Alcón & Jordà, 2008)
SLA: Second language acquisition, a field of study that focuses on how languages are
learned (De Bot, Lowie, & Verspoor, 2005a).
Study abroad: Studying in a country which is not the native country of the student,
“experienced differently for each learner as s/he co-creates his or her reality on a daily
basis with interlocutors in the host country” (Lafford, 2008, p. iii).
Target language: The language being learned; defined by Richard-Amato (2003) as “the
language of proficient second language users in whatever environment we find them”
(p.3)
Assumptions
1. The Academic Director of ELS Language Center Charlotte identified a pool of
suitable participants.
2. ELS students understood the interview questions and answered honestly and
thoroughly with sufficient self-awareness.
3. The English language proficiency of the participants was sufficient to allow
metalinguistic processing in that language.

11
Scope, Delimitations, and Limitations
The investigation was limited to the target population of English language
students enrolled in the semi-intensive English program at ELS Language Center located
on the campus Queens University, Charlotte, North Carolina. All of the study
participants were (a) enrolled at the advanced level, (b) participated voluntarily in the
research study, and (c) had attended at least one full four-week session at ELS Language
Center Charlotte.
The responses of the English language learners reflected whether they believed
their proficiency to have been enhanced by out-of-classroom language learning. The
study did not verify, however, whether there has been an actual increase in proficiency as
a consequence of out-of-classroom experiences. Yet another limitation was that no
participants from Saudi Arabia (who comprise the majority of students at the language
school) were included because they are government sponsored and are required to enroll
in the intensive program.
The narratives in the form of language learning histories and sharing of
experience were unavoidably told in English, as I did not speak most of the languages of
the participants. Not using the native language of the participants may have caused some
limitations as to the accuracy of what was told and heard. How an interview progresses
may also depend on the country of origin of the participant. Smorti et al. (2007) assert
that culture shapes narrative.
The findings of this study can reasonably be generalized to similar language
learning situations in English-speaking countries, with the recognition that language

12
learner complexity renders every situation unique. The learners who participated in this
study believed that immersion offers a significant advantage over English language study
in their homelands, and their experiences shed light on this belief. At the same time,
there most likely are English language learners who believe that study in their homelands
suffices, particularly in view of the global community available via the Internet.
Significance of the Study
Although there has been much research with respect to English language learning
in the classroom, there has been little qualitative research investigating out-of-classroom
language learning using narrative inquiry to examine its complexity. In Benson’s (2006)
view, there is a need for “learning beyond the classroom to be theorized in the same way
that classroom learning has been theorized in recent years” (p. 27). Springer and Collins
(2008) asserted that much less research attention has been devoted to understanding how
language classroom interaction experience may differ from and/or complement
experience acquired when interacting with native speakers outside the classroom.
Similarly, Chusanachoti (2009) suggested that insight regarding learners' behaviors
outside the classroom is quite limited, and that “the potential significance of out-of-class
English activities, and what learners can possibly gain from these activities is an under-
explored area in the field” (p. 5). Higgins (2008) argued that “the relationship between
instructed language learning and L2 use outside of classroom contexts is radically
undertheorized” (p. 402). Although the present study did not develop a theory, an
exploration of the topic may contribute to the growing awareness of the role played by
out-of-classroom language learning.

13
Approaching out-of-classroom language learning experiences through narrative
inquiry may lead to recognition of the many intricacies and complex interactions entailed
in that aspect of second language acquisition, providing guidance for learners and
administrators alike. Clandinin and Rosiek (2007) contended that “narrative inquirers
study an individual’s experience in the world and, through the study, seek ways of
enriching and transforming that experience for themselves and others” (p. 42).
The social impact of this study could be substantive. The results of this study
have the potential to identify some areas where language schools could provide guidance
and support to English language learners and instructors. Language educators could
devise structured learning opportunities in the field to better prepare students for the time
they will be on their own with native speakers. Student responses as evinced in the study
may help educators better understand the types of contexts and situations that might
prove problematic during off times, and they could plan accordingly. Both leaders and
learners will benefit by gaining an understanding of what opportunities may exist, how
learners may take advantage of them, and what may impede access. The results of this
study not only add to the research on language learning in general but also augment
current knowledge about out-of-classroom language learning as a subset of autonomous
language learning.
Summary
In this qualitative study using narrative inquiry, the complex nature of English
language learning in an immersion setting with its attendant free time component was
explored from the perspective of 10 participants. Although additional time available for

14
students to use English has been assumed to enhance English language learning, the
results of this study suggested such enhancement was not guaranteed. It did occur with
some participants, however. As the purpose was to hear and analyze participants’
experiences and to identify out-of-classroom learning issues through their stories, it was
appropriate to use narrative inquiry, a research method that employs narratives as a
means to study experience. Data for this qualitative study were collected through audio-
recorded, semistructured individual interviews and analyzed using polyvocal analysis.
In answering the two overarching research questions, this study revealed the beliefs and
strategies of learners who were successfully augmenting their English language learning
through out-of-classroom language learning as well as those who struggled to effect such
augmentation. The responses of the English language learners reflected whether they
believed their proficiency to have been enhanced by out-of-classroom language learning,
but there was no verification of an actual increase in proficiency as a consequence of out-
of-classroom experiences.
Looking at the problem from the perspective of English language learners has
been instructive in understanding their immersion experience, particularly the challenges
and the opportunities encountered outside the classroom. The identification of such
challenges and opportunities in this study will supplement other research that helps those
involved in teaching and learning English understand its complex nature. This research
adds to the growing amount of literature on out-of-classroom language learning.
Although language learning in the classroom has been extensively studied for decades,

15
there has been little qualitative research looking at out-of-classroom language learning
overall, particularly using narrative inquiry to look at its complexity.
The following chapter is a review of the literature that relates to the current study.
Initially, this review discusses language learner autonomy and its subset, out-of-
classroom learning. Study abroad and immersion are addressed, as are the effect and
influence of individual beliefs and characteristics. Narrative inquiry, which serves as the
paradigm for this study, is explicated in the final section of the literature review. Chapter
3 presents a detailed description of the design, methodology, and the procedures used for
the study. Chapter 4 presents the participant narratives and the results of the cross
narrative analysis. Chapter 5 presents the conclusions and recommendations of the study.

16
Chapter 2: Literature Review
The purpose of this study was to determine whether students believed that their
English language learning was furthered by having additional free time during their
immersion experience, as offered by the institution’s semi-intensive option. What
learners do with their free time and the extent to which they are able to recognize and
create opportunities for interaction with native speakers is dependent on a number of
different factors, according to the results of this study. These include the autonomy
exhibited by the learner and specifically the learner’s out-of-classroom endeavors,
expectations, and experience with regard to study abroad, the learner’s motivation and
perceived role in language learning, the influence of the learner’s first culture and
language, and other individual characteristics of the learner such as age, gender,
personality, meta-cognition, and aptitude as well as proficiency in and knowledge of the
language.
The first section of this literature review explicates the current thinking on
language learner autonomy and one aspect of it, out-of-classroom language learning. The
next section addresses study abroad and immersion from the sense of language learners’
expectations and experience. The following section reflects the effect of individual
beliefs and characteristics such as motivation, the learner’s role, first culture and
language, and personal traits on language learning. Narrative inquiry, which serves as the
paradigm for this study, constitutes the topic of the final section of the literature review.
The primary databases searched in this literature review were the EBSCO and
Sage multiple databases. The descriptors used in these searches included (a) language

17
learner autonomy, (b) out-of-class(room) language learning (c) study abroad, (d)
language learning strategies, (e) narrative research, and (f) narrative inquiry. The
searches led to many of the articles mentioned in the literature review. The reference lists
in those articles led to the accessing of other articles through the Walden Library E-
Journal list. The search revealed that very few studies about out-of-classroom language
learning have been completed. A considerable number of the references came from
chapters in edited books or books by one or more authors.
Language Learner Autonomy
In its earliest instantiations in the 1980s, the concept of learner autonomy was
predominantly associated with adult education and self-access learning systems and
seemed to be a matter of learners endeavoring on their own (Little, 2007). By the end of
the 1980s, however, there was a shift of emphasis: Learner autonomy became part of the
discussion in language teaching (Little, 2007). On the whole, for the past thirty years
there has been a steady increase in the number of academic publications addressing
learner autonomy, interpreted in various ways and named by various terms (learner
independence, self-direction, autonomous learning, and independent learning).
Although definitions have varied greatly, learner autonomy researchers have
generally concurred on a “fundamental principle of learner autonomy: learners take
charge of and become responsible for their learning” (Chang, 2007, p. 325). Both inside
and outside the classroom, learners make choices regarding their own learning and find
ways to practice their target language.

18
21st Century Views
More recently, considerable research regarding language learner autonomy has
emerged both with regard to adult language learners studying languages largely of their
own volition and classroom-guided self-directed learning (Gremmo & Riley, 1995; Little,
2007; Littlewood, 1996). Benson (2006) attributed the growing interest in autonomy in
language learning to the ongoing global growth in the language teaching industry.
Benson acknowledged that research on autonomy has moved from a specialized, self-
contained field, characterized by advocacy, toward a propensity to consider autonomy as
a challenging notion that can be characterized in a number of ways.
Autonomy in the classroom reflects trends toward cooperative decision-making
and students doing activities in groups. This trend is not the focus of this dissertation but
is integral to the overall autonomy concept. Autonomy beyond the classroom includes
self-access centers, computer assisted language learning (CALL), distance learning,
tandem learning, study abroad, out-of-classroom learning, preparation for the classroom,
and self-instruction. Of these, this study focused on out-of-classroom learning in a study
abroad context.
Little (2007) suggested that an understanding of language learner autonomy
should reveal what actions are necessary on the part of language educators to develop
autonomous language learners and at the same time provide criteria by which to evaluate
the extent to which autonomy affects the development of proficiency. In his view
“teachers must learn how to produce and manage the many varieties of target language
discourse required by the autonomous classroom” (p. 27). Even though greater learner

19
autonomy is generally thought to enhance acquisition, not all language learners are
positively predisposed to autonomous learning, as Ade-ojo (2005) found in his qualitative
study of adult ESOL students. Using both questionnaires and focus group interviews,
Ade-ojo uncovered negative reactions toward various components of autonomous
learning, leading him to suggest that instructors may need to rethink their assumptions
and approaches toward autonomy. Although not settling the issues surrounding language
learner autonomy, the present study investigated one facet of autonomous learning, out-
of-classroom learning, to appreciate how it may augment formal classroom training.
Out-of-Classroom Learning
SLA has traditionally been linked with what happens in the classroom, but out-of-
classroom learning should also be considered in SLA to form a complete representation
of the complex system of second language acquisition. Many learners find that a good
deal of their learning occurs outside of the classroom, and that it can be complementary
to their programs of instruction (Benson, 2006; Little, 2007; Pearson, 2004; Sato, 2002).
May (2007) observed that informal foreign language learning has occurred
successfully since the beginning of history. In May’s view and that of other prominent
linguists, many who are bi- or multilingual have not acquired their skills as a result of
formal education. Their position argues for the recognition of the role out-of-classroom
endeavors and experiences may play in second language learning.
As observed in Benson (2006), out-of-classroom learning has been characterized
in recent literature as “the efforts of learners who take classroom-based language courses
to find opportunities for language learning and use outside class” (p. 26). Benson

20
suggested that out-of-classroom language learning offers a new direction for research that
may have considerable significance to the theory and practice of learner autonomy.
Benson (2006) cited recent studies suggesting that “students tend to engage in out-of-
classroom learning activities far more than their teachers know” (p. 26). In their
qualitative study, Suh, Wasanasomsithi, Short, and Majid (1999) discovered that
participants used out-of-classroom learning activities to improve their English
conversation skills.
Research is beginning to suggest that out-of-classroom language learning
endeavors may be very important to target language learning. At present, out-of-
classroom language learning is underrepresented in the literature. Pearson (2004)
contended that second language classroom processes have been studied to a much greater
extent than the efforts undertaken by learners outside the classroom to improve their
proficiency and fluency in the target language. Suh et al. (1999) identified the need for
research in this area both with regard to the benefit of specific out-of-classroom activities
and in situations where there is significant diversity among the participants.
An increasing number of learners also study English by themselves outside
institutional settings, in particular, those on the Chinese mainland, although data
regarding their efforts are difficult to obtain, as the learners are normally not associated
with particular institutions (Gao, 2008). Correspondingly, English learners are present in
places and in occupations which would seem surprising, as shown in the results of a
qualitative study conducted by Wongthon and Sriwanthana (2007) on the efforts of Thai
tuk-tuk drivers to learn English outside the classroom. The present study is thus be a step

21
toward filling the gap in knowledge that exists regarding the ways in which out-of-
classroom language learning occurs, the extent to which it complements formal
classroom learning, and the manner in which it enhances second language acquisition.
Benson (2001) divided out-of-classroom learning into three categories: self
instruction, where learners purposefully use available resources to improve their skills;
naturalistic language learning, where learners indirectly learn through communication
and interaction with English speakers; and self-directed naturalistic language learning,
where learners create or seek out a situation where they would be exposed to the
language but may not concentrate directly on language learning while engaged in an
activity (p. 62). The focus of this study was primarily on the out-of-classroom learning
occurring in the third category, but it may be that considerable learning occurs via the
other two categories as well.
Regardless of the cultural learning orientation of the learners themselves, in
particular the perceived tendency of Westerners to be independent vs. the Eastern
reliance on the instructor, it would seem that many learners feel comfortable seeking
engagement beyond the classroom. Such engagement may take a number of forms,
depending to a great extent on whether the learner is immersed in an English-speaking
community or learning English as a foreign language and creating opportunities in a
nonnative English-speaking environment.
Second language learners believe that their language learning is increased by
having opportunities to interact with the target language community, according to Bunt-
Anderson (2004), who recognized the large numbers of students who chose to study

22
abroad in countries where the target language is spoken to be indicative of this belief.
Similarly, Benson (2006) suggested that even though many overseas programs involve
classroom instruction, “their main purpose is usually for students to learn independently
through interaction with native speakers” (p. 26). This suggestion would seem to validate
Freeman’s (1999) observation that English learners at a British university spent large
amounts of time on out-of-classroom learning. The results of his qualitative study, which
used surveys and interviews, led Freeman to suggest that language use outside of the
classroom was an aspect of language learning whose impact needed further investigation.
At the same time, there could be other reasons why language learners decide to
study abroad. They may be expecting to have a native speaker as an instructor in the
classroom or an instructor who might be able to give them guidance for their out-of-
classroom activities. The learners may wish to travel and perceive overseas study a
justification for such travel or a means to obtain a visa. The present study revealed
complex and varied learner motivations, experiences, and expectations.
Among study abroad students, there appears to be a natural inclination to connect
with the target language community. Such an inclination is present for language learners
seeking contact with native speakers when in their homelands as well. Csizér and
Kormos (2008) considered intercultural contact to be an pivotal issue in second language
acquisition, both because “one of the main aims of learning a second language is to be
able to converse with members of other cultures” and because “interaction with speakers
of other languages creates opportunities for developing L2 learners’ language
competence” (p.31). In quantitative research using questionnaires, the researchers found

23
that highly motivated language learners sought intercultural contact more frequently than
learners who were less motivated. In an earlier qualitative study using structured
interviews, Kormos and Csizér (2007) discovered that their participants valued engaging
in conversations with native speakers, perceiving that much can be learned about how
native speakers use the language in real life, out-of-classroom situations.
Many language learners, particularly adult immigrants who have achieved a level
of comfort in the L2, would like to be more involved in professionally and personally
rewarding experiences in their host societies (Springer & Collins, 2008). In their mixed
methods study of the effect of learning contexts on proficiency development, Yashima
and Zenuk-Nishide (2008) found that having more chances to speak increased the desire
of their study participants to communicate well and to be fluent users of English.
At the same time, accessing opportunities to engage in out-of-classroom language
learning is not an automatic occurrence even in immersion settings, especially when it
involves interaction with native speakers. In their qualitative case studies of two
successful English learners, Toohey and Norton (2003) found that effectively gaining
entry into the social networks in learning communities may depend to some extent on the
way in which learners exercise agency in forming and reforming identity. The facility of
interaction may depend not only on the learner, but also on other factors such as the
location of the community, cultural considerations, and providence. It may be difficult in
many instances for foreigners to join the established social networks and socialize with
the residents.

24
Conversely, there are learners who are not seeking to engage with native English
speakers but who wish to learn the language for other reasons such as career
advancement or study opportunities. Some learners enjoy the process of studying a
language, even one for which there is no possibility of conversation, such as Latin or
Ancient Greek.
In a qualitative study using questionnaires, interviews and learner diaries, Hyland
(2004) discovered that language learners preferred to engage in receptive activities such
as listening and reading, rather than in speaking. The participants in the study, conducted
in Hong Kong, had a tendency to focus on activities that did not involve interaction.
Hyland further suggested that the attitudes of some in the community toward speaking
English may dissuade learners from pursuing out-of-classroom language learning despite
ample opportunities to engage in such learning. Such a conflict is not normally in
evidence in English immersion programs, however, as the learner must typically use
English in all instances. At the same time, the learner immersed abroad may seek out
fellow native speakers to such an extent that it interferes with out-of-classroom English
language learning.
According to Pearson (2004), there is considerable evidence that “exposure to
authentic language and opportunities to use the language in natural settings are keys to
the out-of-classroom language learning that forms part of an in-country language learning
experience” (p. 1). In a longitudinal qualitative study employing both questionnaires and
participant interviews, Pearson established that the choices learners made regarding
opportunities for language contact outside of the classroom determined the effectiveness

25
of their out-of-classroom language learning. Errington’s (2005) action research with
English language learners in New Zealand revealed that adult learners require constant
opportunities to use their English skills in realistic, practical and authentic learning
contexts and that affording such helped them develop self-monitoring skills and move
towards greater learner autonomy. Other researchers have found evidence for these
claims. Freeman (1999), for example, indicated that learners need to utilize opportunities
effectively to derive benefit from them.
The connection of out-of-classroom with in-classroom language learning has
received little attention in the literature, although researchers are beginning to assess the
association. Not surprisingly, they are finding their conclusions reflect the complexity of
language learning and the diversity inherent in the learners themselves. In a qualitative
study analyzing online postings in connection with an English language class, Nguyen
and Kellogg (2010) showed solid evidence of the positive language learning outcomes
that can be gained from out-of-classroom efforts expended as part of classroom tasks.
They found that although the tasks were influenced by the course structure and
instruction, the learners acted autonomously as they “actively sought ways to position
themselves toward one another in coconstructed social activities” (p. 70).
Nakatani’s (2010) mixed methods study of oral communication strategies focused
on having learners develop and employ strategies in the classroom that could then be
used in interaction with speakers of the target language outside of the classroom. The
goal behind developing the strategies was to encourage learners to remain in potential
conversations longer, providing opportunities to hear more target language input and

26
produce new utterances (Nakatani, 2010). Learners whose English proficiency was high
were found to benefit more by the use of such strategies than low proficiency learners.
Nakatani discovered that “low proficiency students lacked sufficient strategic knowledge
to maintain their interaction or linguistic knowledge for spontaneous communication” (p.
127-128).
Safford and Costley (2008) described a variety of domains of learning used by
English learners in addition to their formal classroom education. They concluded from
the findings in their qualitative study using student narratives as data that out-of-
classroom endeavors and encounters “all draw from and make use of a range of different
language and literacy practices simultaneously; these literacy practices are interrelated
and not mutually exclusive” (p. 146). In the present study, English language learners
similarly found various ways to supplement their classroom endeavors.
From qualitative interviews in a mixed methods study, Chang (2007) discovered
that learners who noticed their classmates engaging in English learning activities after
class took “positive inspiration” from them; that is to say, “their classmates’ behaviors
motivate them to follow suit” (p. 332). Murray (2008) observed that all of the highly
motivated classroom learners in his study engaged in out-of-classroom learning. His life
history research project involved collecting the language learning stories of adult
Japanese English foreign language (EFL) learners who have attained intermediate to
advanced levels of fluency without having studied or lived overseas. In these stories, the
learners revealed what they did to learn the language outside of the classroom,
uncovering the prominent role played by pop culture in their language learning.

27
Conversely, Wallis (2005) used data gained from questionnaires and interviews in her
mixed methods study to determine that learners valued what they learned in the
classroom more than what they gained from outside activities and endeavors.
In a quantitative study, Cotterall (1999) analyzed data obtained from
questionnaires to conclude that the majority of her study participants believed they should
find their own opportunities to use English rather than rely on teachers or classmates for
interaction. She further established that they considered their effort outside of the
classroom to be more important for successful learning than what they did in the
classroom. Still, to foster complementation of in- and out-of-classroom language
learning, instructors could ask students to share their experiences as an in-class activity to
make out-of-class learning more prevalent and productive.
In a qualitative, multiple case study of two adult English learners, Springer and
Collins (2008) found that real-world experience may help students make better use of the
time spent in the language classroom, although the role the participants played and the
nature of interactions differed with the environment. Within the classroom, the
participants functioned as language learners, whereas in their out-of-classroom capacity
as volunteer tutors of school-aged students, they became language users (Springer &
Collins, 2008, p. 39). In classroom activities, the participants focused on the language
rather than task completion, whereas in their capacity as tutors, language was secondary
to the task. Springer and Collins found that unlike in the classroom, language became
much more of a vehicle for communication than an object of reflection in the tutoring
situation. An additional benefit that real-world interaction appeared to offer was the

28
opportunity to practice listening to and interacting with several native speakers at the
same time.
Similarly, Dudley (2007) found solid evidence in her qualitative study that
volunteering opportunities can provide linguistic and social benefits to adult immigrant
L2 learners. Using questionnaires and interviews to determine the extent of and nature of
volunteering among Canadian immigrants, she concluded that opportunities supporting
English as a medium of communication and that encourage students to use the target
language, such as volunteering, should be included in an ESL learner’s experience.
According to Schauer (2006), some ESL learners reported that opportunities to
observe everyday life interactions helped them to notice the differences between their
own speech and that of native speakers, after which they modified their language
according to the native-speaker norms. In a qualitative study using semistructured
interviews and questionnaires, Schauer found that English learners immersed abroad are
also exposed more often to everyday out-of-classroom practice and consequently increase
their pragmatic awareness.
Out-of-classroom learning is necessarily different when occurring in the target
language country as opposed to the learner’s native country, although the nontraveling
learner can create and take advantage of some opportunities. At home, the learner has to
make a much greater effort to interact with native speakers. Due to the availability of the
Internet and English language entertainment, however, receptive activities may be readily
available in a learner’s country. In his qualitative study, Pikard (1996) used interviews
and questionnaires to explore the out-of-classroom learning strategies and preferences of

29
German EFL students. He found that learners focused mostly on receptive activities such
as listening and reading, but Pikard attributed it primarily to the difficulty in creating
interactive opportunities. Üstünlüoğlu’s (2009) mixed methods study suggested that the
majority of English learners in Turkey “do, at times, engage in autonomous learning
activities both inside and outside the classroom” (p.160), which is coherent with
comparable research conducted in the field (Benson, Chik,& Lim, 2003; Malcolm, 2005;
Toohey & Norton, 2003; Umino, 2005).
Out-of-classroom learning in a target language environment is much more
available both in terms of interaction and receptive learning: Even a trip to the grocery
store could yield abundant learning opportunities. Brown (2008) suggested that the
option exists to eschew such learning: It is the use of opportunities that fosters learning.
At the same time, those learners who do not feel confident or who consider
themselves shy may find the whole experience particularly challenging. Others may put
learning the target language second to other endeavors. As a means to survive
challenging university courses, students may find themselves spending more time
networking in their native language while studying abroad than working to acquire the
target language.
Exceptions aside, White (2008) maintained that “a fundamental challenge of
independent language learning is for learners to develop the ability to engage with,
interact with, and derive benefit from learning environments which are not directly
mediated by a teacher” (p. 3). It may be that a reasonable goal for language programs
(rather than producing native-like fluency in students) should be to help learners develop

30
sufficient command of the language to be able to effect some language learning without a
teacher. Lo’s (2010) descriptive study conducted in Taiwan depicts the process of
developing a reflective portfolio as a means to guiding the language learners toward
greater autonomy.
Study Abroad
This study reflects the experiences of English learners studying abroad, and as
such, there is some value in considering the literature on study abroad in general,
although more research has been conducted on Americans studying foreign languages
abroad than on learners from other countries studying abroad. One quantitative study of
ESL students that showed study abroad in a positive light was conducted by Matsumura
(2001), who compared the pragmatic competence of two groups of English learners, both
before and after one group studied abroad in Canada while the other group remained in
Japan. From data acquired in questionnaires administered over four occasions, he found
that living and studying in the target speech community while in a study abroad program
contributed to the development of foreign language learners’ pragmatic competence.
At the same time, study abroad does not automatically ensure progress. In a
quantitative study utilizing a reaction time judgment task, Wright (2009) noticed that
“immersion helps learners process what linguistic knowledge they already have with
greater efficiency, rather than lead to acquisition of new linguistic knowledge” (p. 10). In
their mixed methods study analyzing data obtained from questionnaires, Amuzie and
Winke (2009) found that participants reported far fewer opportunities to communicate
with native speakers than expected. Learners tended to cluster with friends from the

31
same country both in and outside the classroom, speaking their native language to each
other (Amuzie & Winke, 2009). They detailed the frustration and disappointment of
foreign students regarding the limited contact with native speakers as well as their lack of
expertise in creating opportunities to interact with the community.
In a qualitative study, Kinginger (2008) compiled case histories of language
learners abroad, finding that it is common for study abroad learners, especially when
participating in short-term programs, not to integrate into the host country social
networks. This may be by choice or occur as a result of feeling like unwelcome strangers
as Wang, Singh, Bird, and Ives (2008) uncovered through semistructured interviews in
their qualitative study of Taiwanese nursing students attending universities abroad. The
participants of Gao's (2008) qualitative study of Internet postings echoed the notion that
study or immersion abroad does not automatically increase English proficiency.
Prior to conducting his multiple case study, Malarchar (2004) had assumed that
South Koreans studying abroad would identify cultural barriers that they encountered
while living and studying in the U.S. Instead, his findings “seem to downplay the
necessity of international students to adapt culturally to the host culture when studying
abroad because even those cultural differences encountered were not viewed as critical
barriers barring each informant’s achievement of his or her goals” (p. 175).
Through qualitative analysis of interviews and learner diaries, Tanaka (2007)
found that some learners from Japan studying abroad reported more contact with English
than at home, but less than they had anticipated. They reported limited interactions with
native speakers outside the classroom other than with their host family members. At the

32
same time, learners immersed abroad are more likely to access the readily available
television programs, radio stations, and printed material in the target language.
The host family experiences of study abroad participants were mixed with regard
to interaction (Tanaka, 2007). When the host family encouraged students and helped
them improve their English, the experience was seen positively. In a number of cases,
however, the host family viewed the homestay program as an economic opportunity or
the hosts were busy working and extended no extra effort to help the student with
English. In some cases, the limited English proficiency of the students and the lack of
experience of host families in helping led to a discouraging homestay. In other cases, the
shyness of the students discouraged interaction. There were opportunities to speak
English with other nonnative speakers who were not Japanese, and the participants
welcomed these (Tanaka, 2007).
With regard to length of study, Amuzie and Winke (2009) found that the longer a
learner had studied abroad, the stronger was his or her belief in learner autonomy. But it
may be argued that learners who start with strong beliefs in learner autonomy choose to
be abroad longer. The data from Llanes and Muñoz’s (2009) quantitative study
suggested that even short stays abroad (3-4 weeks) were valuable in terms of improved
second language proficiency, although no correlation between language learner autonomy
and the increase in proficiency was identified. Comparing performance on language
tasks tested both prior and subsequent to study abroad, they found that the improvement
experienced by most participants was particularly surprising given that participants did

33
not seem to have taken full advantage of the opportunities that the stay abroad context
offered (Llanes & Muñoz, 2009).
In terms of delivery of instruction while immersed, Serrano and Muñoz (2007)
used a series of tests in their quantitative study to discover that concentrating the hours of
foreign language instruction was more beneficial for the students than distributing them
across time. Their findings suggest that the approach used by the students in this study
with regard to attending either an intensive or semi-intensive course of instruction with
attendant out-of-classroom language learning should have resulted in increased
proficiency in English, as both programs offer concentrated instruction.
Learners’ perceptions can influence study abroad experiences and affect ensuing
reflection on them (Amuzie & Winke, 2009). Learners’ beliefs about language learning
while studying abroad may be relevant to aspects of the experience such as a commitment
to it, expectations of it, and success with it. It may be as well that language learners
begin their immersion with a set of language learning strategies or that they develop new
language learning strategies as a result of their experiences. Taking a grounded theory
approach in his qualitative study, Gao (2006) identified changes in learning strategies in
the case of Chinese students as a result of studying abroad in the U.K.
Study or immersion abroad is widely considered the most favorable environment
for acquisition, although some scholars question this assumption. Freed, Segalowitz, and
Dewey (2004) conducted a longitudinal mixed methods research study analyzing data
from proficiency tests, questionnaires, and interviews. They contended that “it is not the
context per se that promotes various types of learning but rather … the nature of the

34
interactions, the quality of the experiences, and the efforts made to use the L2 that render
one context superior to another with respect to language gain” (Freed et al., 2004, p. 196).
Further, Segalowitz and Freed (2004) tested the assumption by conducting a mixed
methods study analyzing data from proficiency tests, learner journals, and interviews.
The current research on study abroad appears to support the “din in the head”
hypothesis first advanced by Barber (1980). Barber suggested that hearing a language in
a natural environment such as while traveling abroad could trigger an awakening of the
target language to the exclusion of others. In an autoethnographic account, she reported
that her overall command of Russian “improved more in a single week in Russia than it
would have in a month or two of intensive reading” (Barber, 1980, p. 30). The Din in the
Head hypothesis, as revisited by Krashen (1983), contended that the din results from
stimulating the language acquisition device, indicating that language acquisition is
occurring. More recently, De Bot (2008) conceptualized the din experienced by a
language learner in a target environment as building up to a point of criticality and
subsequently turning receptive knowledge into productive knowledge of the language.
He acknowledged, however, that there is no research that supports this idea.
Nevertheless, it is generally agreed that study or immersion in a target language appears
to have the potential to impact language learning positively.
Learner Factors Associated with Autonomy
SLA researchers are reluctant to identify causes and effects with regard to second
language acquisition, as they recognize its very individual nature. Griffiths (2008a)
observed that learner variables (such as use of strategies, aptitude, learning style,

35
motivation, age, beliefs, culture, gender, personality, metacognition, or autonomy)
“interact in patterns of great complexity, unique to each individual learner, making any
attempts at cause and effect generalizations difficult to justify” (p. 94). Similarly,
Larsen-Freeman and Cameron (2008) contended that the variation inherent in the
complex system of individual language learners results from learner factors such as
learner age, experience, self-sufficiency, and motivation.
Extending the idea of complexity, Benson (2006) suggested that “there are new
and often complex understandings of the role of autonomy in language teaching and
learning” (p. 22). He described autonomy as a “contextually-variable construct”
warranting further research (Benson, 2006, p. 34). Svalberg (2009) similarly considered
her construct of engagement with language to be dynamic and complex, suggesting that it
is up to the reader to “decide whether this makes engagement too all-encompassing to be
useful or if it may be a useful construct precisely because of its complexity” (p. 256).
Learner factors are influenced by their environment. In comparing the various
contexts in their study, Freed and Segalowitz (2004) concluded that:
Different language-learning contexts can differentially lead to gains in oral
performance, but the relationship between what a context offers and the nature of
what an individual brings to the learning situation is both crucial and complex.
Contexts differ in terms of what learning opportunities they present. Learners
differ in terms of how ready they are linguistically and cognitively to seize the
opportunities provided and to benefit from them once they do. (p. 196)

36
Language learning is acknowledged as a highly complex and dynamic process
driven by many interactions as well as context. De Bot, Lowie, and Verspoor (2005a,
2005b) suggested that the characteristics of a system are exhibited in each individual
language user: The system is dynamic, the components are all directly or indirectly
connected, it is constantly changing, and it is self-organizing. Similarly, Larsen-Freeman
and Cameron (2008) contended that because “individuals interact and shape their own
environment, each individual’s experience of language is different, and each instance of
that experience is different, with an individual’s language resources reflecting this
variability” (p. 87).
The results of Larsen-Freeman’s (2006) mixed methods study of five Chinese
learners of English corroborate the concept of individuality and complexity in language
learning. Larsen-Freeman examined the speech and writing proficiency of five Chinese
learners of English, using quantitative measures to see how the system changed and
organized over time and qualitative interviews to ascertain how the use of language
changed to produce new performances. She concluded that when “group data are
disaggregated, it is clear that there are many paths to development…. as the language
resources of each individual are uniquely transformed through use” (Larsen-Freeman,
2006, p. 590).
Similarly, Gan, Humphreys and Hamp-Lyons (2004) gathered qualitative data
through, diaries, interviews, and electronic correspondence with nine thriving and nine
unsuccessful EFL learners at two Chinese mainland universities. The authors found that
“different levels of success may be explained by a complex and dynamic interplay of

37
internal cognition and emotion, external incentives, and social context” and they argued
that “the findings imply the need to take a holistic view of variation in language learning
outcomes” (Gan et al., 2004, p. 229).
The Learner’s Role
Unlike classroom instruction, which offers the benefit of guidance and
supervision, out-of-classroom language learning beyond homework and study of class
materials entails at least some resourcefulness on the part of the learner to initiate and
participate in an activity. In this way, individuals seeking out-of-classroom learning
opportunities in the target language have a proactive role to play (Kawai, 2008;
Littlewood, 1999). Amuzie and Winke (2009) found that learners often recognize the
need to take the initiative and create learning opportunities for themselves. Ushioda
(2008) argued that motivation to undertake language learning, specifically with regard to
out-of-classroom efforts, must emanate from the learner, driven by learners’ own
personal needs, goals, and interests. Gao (2008) similarly found that most participants
accepted responsibility for their own learning and actively sought to find ways to acquire
English on their own.
Learners often come to the realization that their progress in the language is in
their hands and that they have a role to play in when studying abroad. Amuzie and
Winke (2009) asserted that:
Though unfortunate, the paucity of meaningful communication in the face of an
abundance of potential opportunities seems to play a role in helping learners
realize what their own role and responsibility for learning should be, resulting in a

38
significant increase in beliefs about learner independence. (p. 375)
Murray and Kojima (2007) pointed to the vital role precommunicative activities
can play in the individual’s efforts to engage with native speakers in their qualitative
study eliciting data through a language learner history approach. Kojima, a native
Japanese speaker who is a language learner of both English and German, went to
substantial effort to prepare for scheduled encounters with native speakers, an endeavor
that she contended greatly increased the success of the encounters. She further attributed
her accomplishments in second language learning to the combination of strategies she
used to be ready for communicative opportunities such as self-talk (practicing target
language in inner speech) and shadowing (silently following along with target language
dialogues). Kawai (2008) echoed the importance of preparing for oral encounters in
advance, finding evidence for it in his qualitative study that used questionnaires to extract
the language learning histories of two adult English language learners. Both participants
described elaborate preparations for interactions as key elements of their language
learning strategies. Barber (1980), in speaking of her immersion in Russian and the
amount of input she was receiving, noted that “the constant rehearsal of these phrases of
course was making it easier and easier to speak quickly and fluently; things popped out as
prefabricated chunks” (p. 30).
Kormos and Csizér (2007) similarly discovered that the mere chance of meeting
someone with whom one can practice the L2 has a positive effect on effort in that the
student may prepare for a potential encounter in advance. Kobayashi (2007) presented
the consequences of not preparing for either study or encounters with native speakers in

39
an interpretive study that used both questionnaires and in-depth interviews with some
participants. Four accomplished professionals chose to study English abroad without
having engaged in any prior preparation for the experience and consequently were
profoundly disappointed with their own performance (Kobayashi, 2007). Preparations
for interaction outside the classroom could be initiated in the classroom, potentially
yielding positive results and enhancing learners’ confidence. Other types of preparation
could also assist language learners to achieve an understanding of the structure of
languages, language change, and discourse, thereby facilitating use of the target
language.
As suggested in the section on study abroad, learners seeking out-of-classroom
learning experiences may need to take a more active role in creating opportunities than
they had expected would be necessary. Analyzing the results of his longitudinal,
quantitative study, Taguchi (2008) found that living in the target community alone might
not facilitate pragmatic learning if learners do not actively seek opportunities for practice.
According to Nel (2008), research suggests that good language learners may be more
independent in their learning styles and better able to manage contextual variables than
poorer learners. At the same time, she allowed that “the dynamic nature of the individual
learners and the continuously changing contextual factors make the compilation of a
generic, stylistic profile of the good language learner impossible” (Nel, 2008. p. 53).
In focusing on language learner autonomy in the classroom, Little (2007)
suggested that although language learners “need to interact with input they can
understand, it is also clear that their own efforts to communicate increasingly complex

40
messages in speech and writing play an essential role” in developing proficiency (p. 21).
Even when there is a connection between the classroom and out-of-classroom interaction,
much of the onus for acquisition falls on the learner. In an action research venture,
House (2002) designed an ESL curriculum wherein English learners volunteered in the
community in various activities, sometimes as a group and sometimes individually. From
her reflection on the course as a whole, she concluded that “much of the best learning
must take place out of my control and that much of the students’ learning depends on
choices they make alone” (House, 2002, p. 88).
Recognition of the learner’s role in language learning has significantly influenced
the direction of research as the role of learning is now seen as a part of the complex
process of language teaching. Rubin (2008) considered the increased recognition and
attention to the critical role of learners in shaping their own learning to be one of the most
substantive changes occurring in the field of language research and teaching since her
earlier publication (Rubin, 1975). The current study complemented this direction of
research in that the language learner was found to be fundamental to the learning process
in out-of-classroom learning.
Motivation and Autonomy
Although the distinctions of instrumental versus integrative and extrinsic versus
intrinsic are still in play, motivation is increasingly being viewed as part of the
complexity entailed in language learning. Motivation is considered in a discussion of
out-of-classroom learning, as the autonomy inherent in such would preclude external
motivators such as an instructor or classmates. Learners must often initiate and grasp

41
opportunities to interact in the target language, actions that suggest motivation.
Conversely, a lack of motivation to learn the language can result in avoidance of
opportunities.
Learners who have put themselves in a foreign country to study and absorb a
language usually show motivation both to learn the language and to experience the
culture. Even learners who are not immersed in the target language may find their
motivation is enhanced by a desire to understand and experience some aspects of a
foreign culture. Murray (2008) found that the desire to look beyond the boundaries of
their worlds into other societies and customs was a strong motivation for the participants
in his study to acquire English. It may be the case in the present study, where an interest
in exploring the culture results in a learner’s choosing the semi-intensive option.
There may need to be an additional show of motivation for the learner to take full
advantage of the context. Ushioda (2008) maintained that learners may need to devise
ways to motivate themselves during the learning process. These might include “setting
themselves concrete short-term targets, engaging in positive self-talk, motivating
themselves with incentives and self rewards, or organizing their time effectively to cope
with multiple tasks and demands” (Ushioda, 2008, p. 26). The participants in this study
were clearly motivated, as they had gone to great lengths to study English abroad, but
from there the extent and form of motivation varied between learners.
Oxford (2003) included motivation in one of the four themes of her L2 learner
autonomy model along with context, agency, and learning strategies. She argued that
“truly rich research can emerge when we use multiple methodologies to uncover deeper

42
meanings for context, agency, motivation, and learning strategies, all of which should be
part of the tapestry of learner autonomy” (Oxford, 2003, p. 91).
Similarly, Svalberg (2009) considered her dynamic construct of ‘engagement’ to
be similar to ‘motivation’ in that both imply a degree of autonomy, although her
construct includes cognitive and social components as well as well as affective ones (p.
249). The cognitive components in her model included alertness and focused attention,
whereas the social components included interaction and agency. (She acknowledged that
motivated individuals may be alert, focused, and interactive.) In her view, the term
‘motivation’ does not imply anything about these components (Svalberg, 2009, p. 245).
Her qualitative study gathered support for the construct using data acquired through
interviews and observations of English language students in the United Kingdom.
Language Learning Strategies
Autonomous language learners most likely devise and employ language learning
strategies to achieve their objectives. Much research on language learning strategies has
been conducted since Rubin’s (1975) seminal work on what could be learned from good
language learners. In reflecting on what she might adjust from her earlier work based on
current thinking, Rubin (2008) asserted that her most basic modification is the
recognition that “although good learners use strategies, not all strategies are created
equal” (p. 11). In her view, it is not the strategy itself that leads to effective learning, but
rather how the strategy is or is not used to attain learner goals (Rubin, 2008).
Rivera-Mills and Plonsky (2007) considered learner autonomy in connection with
the use of language learning strategies, noting consensus indicates that the more students

43
self-regulate, the more learning strategies they will use. Similarly, Oxford (2008)
examined the relationship between independent language learning, autonomy, and
learning strategies. In the present study that explored the way learners autonomously
took advantage of their free time to enhance their English language acquisition, the extent
to and the way in which learners use language learning strategies was examined. Even
though this study did not address whether learning strategies can be taught, there was
some evidence of the sharing of strategies both within and outside of the classroom.
A number of recent studies advanced the notion that learners’ strategy use is
dynamic, varies across context, and is hence a temporally and contextually situated
occurrence (Carson and Longhini, 2002; Cheng & Fox, 2008; Chik, 2007; Gao, 2003;
Gao, 2006; Nakatani, 2010; Ruan, 2007; Takeuchi, 2003). Takeuchi’s (2003) qualitative
research of foreign language learners’ stories illuminated the way that learners shifted
strategy according to the stage of learning and for various learning contexts. Whatever or
wherever the context, learners make use of a variety of material and social resources to
practice English and to attempt to clarify their understanding (Palfreyman, 2006). At the
same time, White (2008) suggested that learners must know themselves well to develop
strategies that take advantage of the context.
Griffiths (2008a) employed the English Language Learning Strategy Inventory
(ELLSI) in her quantitative study followed by a longitudinal extension to the study when
considering the strategies used by English language learners at a private language school
in New Zealand. The results showed that successful language learners used the strategies
of engaging with and listening to native speakers more frequently than those struggling to

44
learn the language, but this might be because they are capable of doing so. Griffiths
acknowledged, however, that the use and effect of language learning strategies is
complex and varies with the individual.
The participants in Buttaro’s (2004) longitudinal case study embraced a variety of
language learning strategies, most of which included extensive contact with English and
with native speakers, regardless of their lack of confidence in their proficiency. Using
observation, interviews, questionnaires, and essays written by the participants, Buttaro
examined the use of strategies in various contexts both in and out of the classroom.
Cheng and Fox (2008) used semistructured interviews in a grounded theory
approach to explore the experiences of second language students studying English while
preparing to attend or attending Canadian universities. They found that their participants
developed their own learning and coping strategies not only to improve learning within
their regular academic subjects but also to increase their social effectiveness. Similarly,
Wang et al. (2008) discovered that to overcome language difficulties, Taiwanese nursing
students in Australia adopted the strategies of immersing themselves in English and
interacting with English-speaking people as often as possible.
As suggested in the preceding discussion, language strategies tend to be
individualized, and the results of their application vary as well. Using a biographical
approach to her qualitative study, Chik (2007) contrasted the language learning
experiences, strategies, and results of two English language learners in Hong Kong. She
concluded that the strategies chosen by learners reflect their personal identity with the
target language and are highly individual. In qualitative research using a case study

45
approach, Cotterall (2008) examined two of the good learner strategies offered by Rubin
(1975), applying them to two students studying foreign languages in New Zealand. She
found that learners can adopt the strategies of the “good language learner” without
achieving either their own or course goals (Cotterall, 2008, p. 118). She suggested that
strategies need to be operationalized if they are to be of use to language learners. For
example, the strategy stating that the good language learner practices (the target
language) as often as possible, “needs to be linked to meaningful instances of personal
language use if learners are to persist with it” (Cotterall, 2008, p. 118). This study
showed that the participants did persist with their learning strategies, the most prevalent
of which was to use English whenever feasible.
First Culture and Language Influence
The effect of native language and culture in language learner autonomy has not
been explicated from research conducted thus far. Schmenk (2005) argued that in the
current discussion of autonomy, issues regarding culture are not fully reflected, making
language learner autonomy a seemingly neutral global concept. In her view, simply
promoting the notion leaves it with little content. At the same time, she saw potential
value in the concept of language learner autonomy if reframed with respect to local
language learning environments or recognition of cultural contexts.
Others, such as Benson, Chik, and Lim (2003), sought to uncover the connection
in their qualitative study using a narrative inquiry approach. Examining the language
learning histories of two English language learners, they found that a learner’s efforts to
attain personal goals and desires seemingly weakened the influence of the native culture

46
with regard to language learner autonomy. The authors acknowledged, however, that the
experiences of the learners they encountered could be atypical of Asian learners. Ruan
(2007) conducted a quantitative study using questionnaires to uncover Chinese students’
beliefs about self-regulation in their English learning and their relationship to autonomy.
He construed from the results that learner beliefs and motivation are dynamic aspects of
language learning that might be linked to students’ learning situation at a particular stage
rather than with the overall development of their second language proficiency” (Ruan, p.
83).
There has been a tendency to characterize groups of learners based on their
cultural and linguistic backgrounds. Palfreyman (2003) observed that a major question
for educators is “whether autonomy is appropriate as a universal goal or whether it is less
valid, less relevant or less effective in particular national/ethnic cultures” (p. 6). A
number of researchers caution against such stereotyping, however, arguing that individual
dispositions may be quite flexible in learning situations. Lamb (2004) challenged the
view that learner autonomy is not an instinctive attribute of Asian cultures, specifically
Indonesian culture, in his qualitative study using a case study approach. In a qualitative
study using an action research approach with student reflections as data, Gieve and Clark
(2005) found that Chinese students of English studying in an abroad setting expressed as
much appreciation of autonomous learning as analogous European students and alleged
to have successfully used opportunities for such learning.
Halliday (2003) similarly argued for an approach to learner autonomy in which
individuals can learn autonomously, regardless of the culture from which they come. The

47
mixed methods research of Gan (2009) supported this view. He found that both the
mainland Chinese and Hong Kong students “demonstrated an overall positive attitude
towards self-directed learning, reflecting a desire to make their own choices and engage
actively in their own language learning, which can be taken as a rejection of the
observation commonly made about Asian learners that they are passive and teacher-
dependent” (p.52). In reviewing the research connecting culture and proficiency,
Finkbeiner (2008) concluded that learners from all cultural, ethnic, and national
backgrounds can be good language learners. She acknowledged, however, that
“individual and cultural diversity influence language learning decisions and choices”
(Finkbeiner, 2008, p. 138).
Conversely, Üstünlüoğlu (2009) saw it as given that “autonomy and motivation in
foreign language learning is context-specific and is perceived differently in different
cultures” (p. 152). Some learners may acquire the language more effectively if learning
and being instructed in a familiar way. Similarly, Smith (2003) asserted that
“individuals’ control over their own learning can only be developed in ways which are
relevant to them, and always in relation to and under the influence of particular
background and new cultures” (p. 256).
Another possibility in arguing for culture as a factor is that English and the
cultural assumptions of English-speaking countries might be relatively more difficult for
people from some linguistic and cultural backgrounds to understand and learn, thus
hindering their potential to act autonomously. People from non-European cultures may
feel less comfortable with English speakers and more inclined to seek the company of

48
their compatriots, thus limiting their interaction with native speakers and the potential
enhancement of their language skills resulting from such interaction.
Learners and educators can benefit by having some awareness of the influence of
a learner’s first culture and language. Pizziconi (2009) engaged in ethnographic
interviews and confirmed indirectness in the speech of two Japanese speakers, leading
her to suggest that stereotypical perceptions need to be acknowledged and considered
with regard to language teaching and learning. In her qualitative dissertation using a
narrative inquiry approach, Yu (2007) found that all her participants experienced
considerable shame while speaking English in various contexts. Yu suggested that
teachers and learners should be aware of the existence of shame in speaking English, but
she did not determine if this experience was culturally specific to Koreans only.
Individual Learner Characteristics
SLA research dealing with such factors as metacognition, age, personality, and
gender, in concert with autonomy is scarce, but some research approaches an association.
Anderson (2008) argued that good language learners develop metacognitive skills that
enable them to manage their own learning, making them less dependent on others or the
learning situation. In his view, language learners of all levels of proficiency can benefit
from classroom efforts promoting metacognitive behavior. Cotterall and Murray’s
(2009) three year quantitative study suggested that students’ language-related self-
concept can be enhanced by exposure to a learning structure that provides both freedom
and support, enabling students to explore and expand their metacognitive knowledge by
taking responsibility for all aspects of their learning.

49
In her qualitative study using semistructured interviews of three older learners of
English immersed abroad in New Zealand, Griffiths (2008b) found that motivation and
the use of strategies could overcome a possible disadvantage of age suggested by the
critical period hypothesis, although it can be argued that older learners are more
comfortable learning autonomously.
Although one might suppose that extroverted individuals would engage more
frequently with native speakers and thus achieve more fluency, Ehrman’s (2008) findings
contradicted both suppositions. She used data from the Foreign Service Institute to
correlate personality (as indicated on the standard Myers Briggs Type Indicator tests)
with achievement of a level four proficiency in a foreign language. The results of her
preliminary quantitative study indicated that the best language learners tended to have
introverted personalities. She acknowledged, however, that her research was limited and
that motivated individuals can become good language learners regardless of their
personalities. Ehrman suggested that future research could consider personality in
correlation with a preferred learning format, comparing formal language instruction to
language learning accomplished mainly through immersion.
With regard to gender, research shows that differences between males and
females in language learning preferences and achievement are inclined to be
insignificant, with a greater disparity between individual language learners than between
genders (Nyikos, 2008).

50
Literature Related to the Methodology
Narratives have been around since language began, but narrative methodologies
for research are just emerging. There are now journals such as Narrative Inquiry and
entire volumes devoted to the subject, such as the Handbook for narrative inquiry (2007).
Narrative inquiry is no longer limited to literary scholarship but is now cross-disciplinary,
even though there are substantive differences of opinion on the conduct and philosophy
of the field and challenges for the future (Josselson, 2006). Even though these
differences remain to be sorted out, narrative inquiry is vibrant and viable for much
research including the present study.
Narrative inquiry is increasingly a paradigm for qualitative or mixed method
second language acquisition research. It is also referred to as narrative research in the
literature; the terms can be used interchangeably (Clandinin, 2007). Narrative inquiry
includes various methods and “real differences of opinion on the epistemological,
ideological, and ontological commitments of narrative inquirers as well as real
differences with those who do not identify as narrative inquirers” (Clandinin & Rosiek,
2007, p. 37).
Clandinin and Rosiek (2007) situated the philosophical foundation of narrative
inquiry within a Deweyan theory of experience. In their view, “narratives are the form of
representation that describes human experience as it unfolds through time” (Clandinin &
Rosiek, 2007, p. 40). A second language learner’s journey can be viewed as a continuous
experience particularly well-suited for narrative inquiries. Such inquiry would be in
keeping with the way “some narrative researchers employ sociolinguistic analytic tools to

Language learning outside of the classroom

Language learning outside of the classroom

Recommandé

Recommandé

Contenu connexe

Tendances

Tendances (20)

En vedette

En vedette (20)

Similaire à Language learning outside of the classroom

Similaire à Language learning outside of the classroom (20)

Dernier

Dernier (20)

Language learning outside of the classroom