Hostname: page-component-6766d58669-kn6lq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-21T10:36:45.537Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Towards a Model of Learner Variation in Autonomous Foreign Language Learning

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 November 2008

T. S. Rodgers
T. S. Rodgers
Affiliation:
University of Hawaii
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

My intent in this short piece is to provide a context for consideration of learner variables in foreign language learning. I first propose a question set outlining the major issues, as I see them, arising in the design of learner-based foreign language learning systems. I then present a simplified three-part design model comprising knowledge considerations (language needs assessment), instructional considerations (learning access alternatives) and learner considerations (characteristics of learners). A review of some recent work in the first two of these prefaces the discussion of the third, learner considerations. A brief state of the art report on research in learner variables is followed by some speculation on next directions in the determination and description of learner variables within a general design model for learning foreign languages.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Studies in Second Language Acquisition , Volume 2 , Issue 1 , Fall 1979 , pp. 73 - 97
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1979

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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

REFERENCES

Bosco, F. J. and Di Pietro, R. J. 1970. “Instructional Strategies: Their Psychological and Linguistic Bases” IRAL Vol. 8, #1 pages 1–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, H. D. 1976. “Affective Variables in Second Language Acquisition”, Language Learning, Vol. 23, No. 2, pages 231–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Candlin, C. N. 1976. “Communicative Language Teaching and the Debt to Pragmatics”, Georgetown Roundtable Reports, pages 251–252.Google Scholar
Carroll, J. B. 1958. “A Factor Analysis of Two Foreign Language Aptitude Batteries”, Journal of Gen. Psych. LIX, page 379.Google Scholar
Cohen, A. D. and Robbins, M. 1976. “Towards Assessing Interlanguage Performance: The Relationship Between Selected Errors, Learner Characteristics, and Learner Explanations”, Language Learning, Vol. 26 #1, pages 63–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cook, V. 1969 “The Analogy Between First and Second Language Learning”, IRAL, Vol. 7 #3, pages 207–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Corder, S. P. 1973 Introducing Applied Linguistics, Penguin Education, Harmondsworth, pages 256–294.Google Scholar
Doran, S.undated. Reflectivity – Impulsivity and Their Influence on Reading for Inference for Adult Students of ESL, unpublished manuscript, University of Michigan.Google Scholar
Durant, M. D. and Rodgers, T. S. 1976. The Games Workshop: Teachers Manual, Hawaii English Project – Secondary, State of Hawaii, pages G 22–23.Google Scholar
ETIC. 1977. ELT Documents: Games, Simulations and Role-Playing, 77/1, The British Council (ETIC), London.Google Scholar
Ervin-Tripp, S. 1973. “Is Second-Language Learning Like the First”, California University, Berkeley. Paper presented at the annual meeting of Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages, San Juan, Puerto Rico, May 1973.Google Scholar
ETIC. 1978. The Foreign Language Learning Process. The British Council.Google Scholar
Gaff, J. G. and Wilson, R. C. 1971. “Faculty Cultures and Interdisciplinary Studies”, Journal of Higher Education. 42, pages 186–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gardner, R. D. and Lambert, W. E. 1972. Attitudes and Motivation in Second-Language Learning, Newbury House, Rowley, Mass.Google Scholar
Guiora, A. Z. et al. 1973. “Language and Person: Studies in Language Behaviours”, Language Learning #25, pages 43–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hill, C. P. 1977. “A Threshold Level in a European Unit/Credit System for Modern Language Learning by Adults” (Review) English Language Teaching Journal, Vol. XXXI, pages 334–335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holland, J. L. 1973 Making Vocational Choices: A Theory of Careers, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N. J.Google Scholar
Jakobovits, L. A. 1970. Foreign Language Learning: A Psycholinguistic Analysis of the Issues, Newbury House, Rowley, Mass.Google Scholar
Jakobovits, L. A. and Gordon, B. 1974. The Context of Foreign Language Teaching, Newbury House, Rowley, Mass.Google Scholar
King, A. R. 1977. “Curriculum Theory and Educational Change Processes: Comments on the Role of Curriculum Theory in the Hawaii Curriculum Research and Development Group”. Educational Perspectives, Journal of the College of Education, University of Hawaii. Vol.16, No. 2, pages 6–8.Google Scholar
Krawiec, T. S. 1946. “A Comparison of Learning and Retention of Materials Presented Visually and Auditorially”, Journal of Gen. Psych. 34, pages 179–195.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Munby, J. L. 1978. Communicative Syllabus Design: A Sociolinguistic Model for Defining the Content of Purpose-Specific Language Programmes. Cambridge University, Cambridge (in press).Google Scholar
Naiman, N.Frolich, M. and Todesco, A. 1975. “The Good Second Language Learner” TESL Talk #6, pages 58–70.Google Scholar
Newmark, L. and Reibel, D. A. 1968. “Necessity and Sufficiency in Language Teaching”, IRAL IX, pages 145–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nisbet, J. P. and Welsh, J. 1972. “A Local Evolution of Primary School French”, Journal of Curriculum Studies #4, pages 169–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Noss, R. and Rodgers, T. S. 1976. “Does English for Special Purposes Imply a New Kind of Language Syllabus”, RELC Seminar Reports, pages 51–78.Google Scholar
Olson, L. L. and Samuels, S. S. 1972. “The Relationship Between Age and Accuracy of Foreign Language Pronunciation”, Paper – Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago.Google Scholar
Papilia, A. 1976. Learner-Centered Language Teaching: Methods and Materials. Newbury House, Rowley, Mass.Google Scholar
Pask, G. et al. Final Report: Educational Methods using Information about Individual Styles and Strategies of Learning. 2 Vols. SSRC Project HR 1424/1.Google Scholar
Pfeiffer, J. W. and Jones, J. E. 1975 A Handbook of Structured Experiences for Human Relations Training, (5 Vols.), UNIV Associates, San Diego.Google Scholar
Pimsleur, P., Stockwell, R. P. and Comrey, A. L. 1962. “Student Factors in Foreign Language Learning”, Modern Language Journal, ILVI, pages 160–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reibel, D. A. 1971. “Language Learning Strategies for the Adult”, Papers from the 2nd International Congress of Applied Linguistics. Pimsleur, P. and Quinn, T. (eds.), Cambridge University.Google Scholar
Reibel, D. A. 1971. “A Relevant Curriculum: An Instrument for Polling Student Opinion”. North East Conference Reports 1970 Foreign Language and the New Student, pages 7–30.Google Scholar
Richards, J. C. (ed.) 1974 Error Analysis: Perspectives on Second Language Acquisition, Longman, London.Google Scholar
Richterich, Rene. 1973. “Definition of Language Needs and Types of Adults” Part Two in Systems Development in Adult Language Learning, Council of Europe pages 29–88.Google Scholar
Rodgers, T. S. (in press) “Strategies for Individualized Language Learning and Teaching” in Richards, J. (ed.), Understanding Second and Foreign Language Learning, Newbury House, Rowley, Mass.Google Scholar
Ruben, J. 1975. “What the ‘Good Language Learner’ Can Teach Us”, TESOL Quarterly, Vol. 9, No. 1, pages 41–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scovel, T. 1969. “Foreign Accents, Language Acquisition, and Cerebral Dominance”, Language Learning #19 pages 245–254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Selinker, L. 1972. “Interlanguage”, International Review of Applied Linguistics #10, pages 209–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stanchina, C. H. 1976. “Two Years of Autonomy: Practice and Outlook”. Mélanges Pédagogiques, CRAPEL.Google Scholar
Stern, H. H. 1972. “What Can We Learn From the Good Language Learner”, Canadian Modern Language Review #31 pages 304–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Strevens, P. 1977 New Orientations in the Teaching of English, Oxford University Press, London, pages 43–45Google Scholar
Wilkins, D. A. 1972. “Grammatical, Situational and Notional Syllabuses” Paper presented to 3rd International Congress of Applied Linguistics, Copenhagen, (Mimeo).Google Scholar
Witkin, K. A., Dyk, R. B., Faterson, H. F., Goodenough, D. R. and Karp, S. A. 1967. Psychological Differentiation, Wiley, Boston.Google Scholar
Yorio, C. A. 1976. “Discussion of ‘Explaining Sequence and Variation in Second Language Acquisition’”, in Brown, H. D. (ed.) Papers in Second Language Acquisition Language Learning SpecialIssue #4, pages 59–64.Google Scholar