Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dsjbd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T19:59:18.471Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

CONTEXT, CONTACT, AND COGNITION IN ORAL FLUENCY ACQUISITION: Learning Spanish in At Home and Study Abroad Contexts

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 April 2004

Norman Segalowitz  and
Barbara F. Freed
Norman Segalowitz
Affiliation:
Concordia University
Barbara F. Freed
Affiliation:
Carnegie Mellon University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This study investigates the role of context of learning in second language (L2) acquisition. Participants were 40 native speakers of English studying Spanish for one semester in one of two different learning contexts—a formal classroom at a home university (AH) and a study abroad (SA) setting. The research looks at various indexes of oral performance gains—particularly gains in oral fluency as measured by temporal and hesitation phenomena and gains in oral proficiency based on the Oral Proficiency Interview (OPI). The study also examines the relation these oral gains bore to L2-specific cognitive measures of speed of lexical access (word recognition), efficiency (automaticity) of lexical access, and speed and efficiency of attention control hypothesized to underlie oral performance. The learners also provided estimates of the number of hours they spent in extracurricular language-contact activities. The results show that in some respects learners in the SA context made greater gains, both in terms of temporal and hesitation phenomena and in oral proficiency as measured by the OPI, than learners in the AH context. There were also, however, significant interaction effects and correlational patterns indicating complex relationships between oral proficiency, cognitive abilities, and language contact. The results demonstrate the importance of the dynamic interactions that exist among oral, cognitive, and contextual variables. Such interactions may help explain the enormous individual variation one sees in learning outcomes, and they underscore the importance of studying such variables together rather than in isolation.This research was funded in part by a grant to Barbara F. Freed from the Council on International Educational Exchange, New York, in part by a grant from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada to Norman Segalowitz, and in part by a grant from the Dean's Office, Faculty of Arts and Science at Concordia University, to Segalowitz. The authors wish to thank Joe Collentine, Manuel Díaz-Campos, and Barbara Lafford, who are members of the research team involved in the larger project of which this study is one part. A special note of thanks is due to Nicole Lazar, who is also a member of the research team, for her invaluable statistical advice. Finally, the authors would like to thank Conchita Bueno, Hazel Casas, Elizabeth Gatbonton, Randall Halter, Guy Lacroix, Anne-Marie Linnen, Magnolia Negrete, Irene O'Brien, Laura Renteria-Díaz, Marlene Taube, and Naomi Yamasaki, who helped during various phases of this project.

Type
Research Article
Information
Studies in Second Language Acquisition , Volume 26 , Issue 2 , June 2004 , pp. 173 - 199
Copyright
© 2004 Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Ackerman, P. L. (1988). Determinants of individual differences during skill acquisition: Cognitive abilities and information processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 117, 288–318.Google Scholar
Ackerman, P. L. (1989). Individual differences and skill acquisition. In P. L. Ackerman, R. J. Sternberg, & R. Glaser (Eds.), Learning and individual differences: Advances in theory and research (pp. 165–217). New York: W. H. Freeman.
Benjamini, Y., & Hochberg, Y. (2000). On the adaptive control of the false discovery rate in multiple testing with independent statistics. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 25, 60–83.Google Scholar
Berninger, V. W., Abbott, R. D., Billingsley, F., & Nagy, W. (2001). Processes underlying timing and fluency of reading: Efficiency, automaticity, coordination, and morphological awareness. In M. Wolf (Ed.), Dyslexia, fluency, and the brain (pp. 383–414). Timonium, MD: York Press.
Brecht, R., Davidson, D. E., & Ginsberg, R. B. (1995). Predictors of foreign language gain during study abroad. In B. F. Freed (Ed.), Second language acquisition in a study abroad context (pp. 37–66). Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Brecht, R., & Robinson, J. L. (1995). On the value of formal instruction in study abroad: Student reactions in context. In B. F. Freed (Ed.), Second language acquisition in a study abroad context (pp. 317–333). Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Breiner-Sanders, K., Lowe, P., Miles, J., & Swender, E. (2000). ACTFL proficiency guidelines: Speaking, revised 1999. Foreign Language Annals, 33, 13–18.Google Scholar
Carroll, J. B. (1981). Twenty-five years of research on foreign language aptitude. In K. C. Diller (Ed.), Individual differences and universals in language learning aptitude ( pp. 83–118). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
DeKeyser, R. M. (1991). Foreign language development during a semester abroad. In B. F. Freed (Ed.), Foreign language acquisition and the classroom (pp. 104–118). Lexington, MA: D. C. Heath.
DeKeyser, R. M. (2001). Automaticity and automatization. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 125–151). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Dörnyei, Z., & Schmitt, R. (Eds.). (2001). Motivation and second language acquisition. Honolulu: University of Hawai‘i Press.
Ehrman, M. E., & Oxford, R. L. (1995). Cognition plus: Correlates of language learning success. Modern Language Journal, 79, 67–89.Google Scholar
Frank, V. (1997, March). Potential negative effects of homestay. Paper presented at the Middle Atlantic Conference of the American Association for the Advancement of Slavic Studies, Albany, NY.
Freed, B. F. (1995). What makes us think that students who study abroad become fluent? In B. F. Freed (Ed.), Second language acquisition in a study abroad context (pp. 123–148). Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Harley, B., & Hart, D. (2002). Age, aptitude, and second language learning on a bilingual exchange. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Individual differences and instructed language learning (pp. 301–330). Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Hinenoya, K., & Gatbonton, E. (2000). Ethnocentrism, cultural traits, beliefs, and English proficiency: A Japanese sample. Modern Language Journal, 84, 225–240.Google Scholar
Johnson, K. (1996). Language teaching and skill learning. Oxford: Blackwell.
Koponen, M., & Riggenbach, H. (2000). Overview: Varying perspectives on fluency. In H. Riggenbach (Ed.), Perspectives on fluency (pp. 5–24). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
Lafford, B. (1995). Getting into, through, and out of a survival situation: A comparison of communicative strategies used by students studying Spanish abroad and “at home.” In B. F. Freed (Ed.), Second language acquisition in a study abroad context (pp. 97–121). Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Lapkin, S., Hart, D., & Swain, M. (1995). A Canadian interprovincial exchange: Evaluating the linguistic impact of a three-month stay in Quebec. In B. F. Freed (Ed.), Second language acquisition in a study abroad context (pp. 67–94). Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Levelt, W. J. M. (1989). Speaking: From intention to articulation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
MacIntyre, P. D., & Charos, C. (1996). Personality, attitudes, and affect as predictors of second language communication. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 15, 3–26.Google Scholar
Magnan, S. S. (1986). Assessing speaking proficiency in the undergraduate curriculum: Data from French. Foreign Language Annals, 19, 429–438.Google Scholar
Miller, L., & Ginsberg, R. B. (1995). Folk linguistic theories of language learning. In B. F. Freed (Ed.), Second language acquisition in a study abroad context (pp. 294–315). Amsterdam: Benjamins.
O'Malley, J. M., & Chamot, A. U. (1990). Learning strategies in second language acquisition. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Paige, R. M., Cohen, A., Kappler, B., Chi, J., & Lassegard, J. (2002). Maximizing study abroad. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Perfetti, C. A. (1985). Reading ability. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Quinlan, P. T. (1992). Oxford psycholinguistic database. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Robinson, P. (2002). Effects of individual differences in intelligence, aptitude, and working memory on adult incidental SLA. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Individual differences and instructed language learning (pp. 211–266). Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Ross, S., Yoshinaga, N., & Sasaki, M. (2002). Aptitude-exposure interaction effects on wh-movement violation detection by pre-and-post-critical period Japanese bilinguals. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Individual differences and instructed language learning (pp. 267–298). Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Schmidt, R. (1992). Psychological mechanisms underlying second language fluency. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 14, 357–385.Google Scholar
Segalowitz, N. (1997). Individual differences in second language acquisition. In A. M. B. de Groot & J. Kroll (Eds.), Tutorials in bilingualism (pp. 85–112). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Segalowitz, N. (2000). Automaticity and attentional skill in fluent performance. In H. Riggenbach (Ed.), Perspectives on fluency (pp. 200–219). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
Segalowitz, N. (2003). Automaticity and second language acquisition. In C. Doughty & M. Long (Eds.), The handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 382–408) Oxford: Blackwell.
Segalowitz, N., & Hulstijn, J. (in press). Automaticity in bilingualism and second language learning. In J. F. Kroll & A. M. B. de Groot (Eds.), Handbook of bilingualism: Psycholinguistic approaches. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Segalowitz, N., O'Brien, I., & Poulsen, C. (1998). Evidence for a domain-specific component of attentional control in skilled performance. Brain and Cognition, 37, 129–132.Google Scholar
Segalowitz, N., & Segalowitz, S. (1993). Skilled performance, practice, and the differentiation of speed-up from automatization effects: Evidence from second language word recognition. Applied Psycholinguistics, 14, 369–385.Google Scholar
Segalowitz, S., Segalowitz, N., & Wood, A. G. (1998). Assessing the development of automaticity in second language word recognition. Applied Psycholinguistics, 19, 53–67.Google Scholar
Shebilske, W., Goettl, B., & Regian, J. W. (1999). Executive control of automatic processes as complex skills develop in laboratory and applied settings. In D. Gopher & A. Koriat (Eds.), Attention and performance XVII: Cognitive regulation of performance—Interaction of theory and application (pp. 401–432). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Skehan, P. (2002). Theorising and updating aptitude. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Individual differences and instructed learning (pp. 69–93). Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Sternberg, R. J. (2002). The theory of successful intelligence and its implications for language-aptitude testing. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Individual differences and instructed language learning (pp. 13–43). Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Taylor, D. M., Ménard, R., & Rhéault, E. (1977). Threat to ethnic identity and second-language learning. In H. Giles (Ed.), Language, ethnicity, and intergroup relations (pp. 98–118). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Wilkinson, S. (1998). Study abroad from the participants' perspective: A challenge to common beliefs. Foreign Language Annals, 31, 23–39.Google Scholar