Affect in Language Learning

This paper presents the issue of affect and its role in language learning. Different affective factors will be taken into consideration, as well as their relevance to the process of learning English: motivation, attitudes and beliefs, anxiety, learning styles and the learning environment.

IntroductionRecent research in psychology has underlined the importance of emotionality in the

individual’s life, demonstrating a close relationship between success in life and non-cognitive aspects of human intelligence, such as affective, personal and social factors. The concept of emotional intelligence has emerged, by which we understand an ability, capacity, or skill to perceive, assess, and manage the emotions of one's self, of others, and of groups.

Among different models that have been suggested, we would like to mention Goleman’s theory, according to which emotional intelligence may be divided into five competencies, i.e.:

- The ability to identify and name one's emotional states and to understand the link between emotions, thought and action. (self-awareness)

- The capacity to manage one's emotional states — to control emotions or to shift undesirable emotional states to more adequate ones. (self-control)

- The ability to enter into emotional states (at will) associated with a drive to achieve and be successful. (motivation)

- The capacity to read, be sensitive to, and influence other people's emotions. (empathy)

- The ability to enter and sustain satisfactory interpersonal relationships. (social skills) (Goleman, 1995)

This research has also been seminal in the field of language learning, and Stern’s assertion that “the affective component contributes at least as much and often more to language learning than the cognitive skills” (Stern, 1983: 386) is supported by a series of recent cross-disciplinary research revealing that affective variables have significant influence on language achievement. Damasio (1994) explains that emotions are a part of reason on the neurobiological level, and LeDoux considers emotion and cognition as partners: “minds without emotions are not really minds at all” (1996: 25).

Schumann (1975) offers a very good overview of early literature on affective factors and the problem of age in SLA1 research, and Arnold and Brown (1999) provide a more contemporary perspective from the view of the language learner as an individual (anxiety, inhibition, extroversion/introversion, self-esteem, motivation - which can be either extrinsic or intrinsic, learner styles) and as a participant in a socio-cultural situation (empathy, classroom transactions, cross-cultural processes).

In the following we will analyse affect in second language learning starting from Stern’s (1983: 383) three broad concepts of affect (attitudes, motivation and personality), to which we will add

1 SLA = Second Language Acquisition

beliefs, anxiety, learning styles (personality) and the learning environment. Towards a definition of affect

Among various definitions provided by specialist literature we will turn our attention to the most relevant ones. Arnold (1999) defines affect in terms of “aspects of emotion, feeling, mood or attitude which condition behaviour”, whereas Dickinson (1987: 25) characterises it as being concerned with the learner’s attitude towards the target language and its users, and with his/her emotional responses. Stevick (1999: 44) propounds the following interpretation (1982):

One’s ‘affect’ towards a particular thing or action or situation or experience is how that thing or that action or that situation or that experience fits in with one’s needs or purposes, and its resulting effect on one’s emotions … affect is a term that refers to the purposive and emotional sides of a person’s reactions to what is going on. (Stevick, 1999: 55)

MotivationIt is a matter of common knowledge that motivation “is a very important, if not the most

important factor in language learning” (Van Lier, 1996: 98), without which even ‘gifted’ individuals cannot accomplish long-term goals, whatever the curricula and whoever the teacher. Therefore, the concept of language learning motivation has become pivotal to a number of theories of L2 acquisition, and motivation has been widely accepted by teachers and researchers as one of the key factors influencing the rate and success of second/foreign language (L2) learning, often compensating for deficiencies in language aptitude and learning. It could be said that all other factors involved in L2 acquisition presuppose motivation to a certain degree.

The first studies on motivation in the field of second language learning were carried out by Gardner and Lambert (1959), who suggested an integrative-instrumental duality (Gardner et al., 1976: 199), widely accepted and confirmed by subsequent studies. Their ten-year-long research program (1972), which proved that success in language attainment was dependent on the learner’s affective reactions toward the target linguistic-cultural group (in addition to aptitude) paved the way for the future study of motivation in SLA.

Later on, in the 1980s the learning situation itself received more attention and Dörnyei identified three sets of motivational components (1994: 276):

a) course-specific motivational components (syllabus, teaching materials, teaching method, learning task);

b) teacher-specific motivational components (teacher personality, teaching feedback, relationship with the students);

c) group-specific motivational components (dynamics of the learning group, goal-orientedness, norm and reward system, group cohesion, classroom goal structures). Another broader definition is provided by Heckhausen (cited in Tremblay & Gardner, 1995:

505-506):The observed goal-directedness of the behaviour, the inception and completion of a coherent behavioural unit, its resumption after an interruption, the transition to a new behavioural sequence, the conflict between various goals and its resolution, all of these represent issues in motivation. (Heckhausen, 1991: 9)

Nevertheless, Van Lier (1996: 100) underlines the fact that the meaning of motivation depends on the perception of human nature that is used, in which context, Deci and Ryan (1985) distinguish between mechanistic and organismic theories, the former seeing the human organism as passive (e.g. behaviourism), and the latter seeing it as active (being volitional and initiating behaviours).

Recent educational theory has rather favoured the second interpretation, with Gardner (1985) describing motivation to learn an L2 as “the extent to which the individual works or strives to learn the language because of a desire to do so and the satisfaction experienced in this activity” (1985: 10). In this definition we will find

i) effort expended to achieve a goal; ii) a desire to learn the language; iii) satisfaction with the task of learning the language.

Gardner and Smythe’s (1975: 222) original model of motivation comprises four main components: i) group-specific attitudes; ii) learners’ motives for learning the target language; iii) affective factors (Stern’s “Generalized Attitudes”); iv) extrinsic and instrinsic motivation (Stern’s “Attitudes towards the learning situation”).

Motivation has often been labelled extrinsic or intrinsic “depending on whether the stimulus for the behaviour originated outside or inside the individual” (Van Lier, 1996: 101):

Extrinsic motivation is like borrowed money, an investment which may eventually pay off, whereas intrinsic motivation is like money you own. Being very highly motivated is like having a lot of money, and like money, motivation can be wasted or well-spent. … In education, motivation is organismic energy-capital to be spent in the learning market. Some of it we bring with us as a genetic endowment, but we may need to learn how to invest it. Some of it we borrow from adults and peers in the form of extrinsic stimuli and coercion. (Van Lier, 1996: 101-102)

Intrinsic motivation is defined in terms of drive theories, by which Van Lier understands “certain basic, psychological needs which are innate in the human being” (1996: 108). Deci and Ryan (1991), on the other hand, see intrinsic motivation as voluntary and spontaneous, independent of reinforcement or biological drives, and needing no external reward, i.e. ‘a non-derivational motivational force’. Van Lier propounds two layers of intrinsic motivation:

i) a basic, organismic motivation consisting of intentionality, affect and effort; ii) a specifically human motivation, grafted onto this organismic one, consisting of

consciousness and choice (hence, deliberation) (1996: 100). Another categorisation was that of integrative vs instrumental motivation, a view

characterised by Crookes and Schmidt (1991) as social-psychological rather than educational, lacking clarity by associating other affective factors with motivation. Van Lier also argues that the emphasis on long-term goals does not allow for the short-term factors operating in the immediate learning context.

Dörnyei’s (1990) findings are also worth mentioning; the factors that he identified as leading to increased motivation are an interest in foreign languages, cultures and people; a desire to broaden one’s view and avoid provincialism and a desire for new stimuli and challenges. Dörnyei (1994) proposes a three-level categorisation of motivation (Language level, Learner level, Situation level) and Williams and Burden (1997:121) present a three-stage model of interdependent factors acting within the social context. According to this model, “decision to act” is central, interacting in a dynamic manner with internal factors (significant others, the nature of the interaction with significant others, the learning environment, the broader context) and external factors (intrinsic interest of activity, perceived value of activity, sense of agency, mastery, self-concept, attitudes, other affective states, developmental age and stage, gender):

… making decisions to act is a central component of motivation. These decisions will be influenced by a number of different causes. If people attach a high value to the outcome of an activity, they will be more likely to be motivated to perform it. People also need to be aroused, often by curiosity or interest, and to sustain their arousal. (Williams & Burden, 1997: 136)

Among other findings on factors that influence motivation in language learning one may mention the contributions brought by different authors, drawing on theories from general psychology: i) needs theory; ii) instrumentality theories; iii) equity theories; and iv) reinforcement theories. (Oxford & Shearin, 1996)

The consensus on the essential role of motivation has lead to further research in order to

conceptualise and assess motivational variables. One thing that should be borne in mind is that the aspect of motivation researchers are focusing on is likely to represent only a part of a more intricate psychological construct. Dörnyei (1998) sees a need for a process-oriented perception of motivation, with a description of the various stages. This might include planning, intention-formulation, appraisal of the situation, generation of concrete tasks, prioritising between multiple tasks, enactment of intentions, and evaluation of outcomes.

An important idea was propounded by Dickinson, who argues that concepts central to autonomy (learner independence, learner responsibility, learner choice, plus decision making, critical reflection and detachment) are all important in cognitive motivation, and sustains that self-instruction leads to increased empathy between teacher and learners and among learners, producing a more cohesive and supportive group of learners, which is motivating in several ways, but in particular is likely to lead to a reduction in inhibition (Dickinson, 1987: 33).

Dickinson (1995: 168) also mentions that motivation to learn and learning effectiveness can be increased in learners who take responsibility for their own learning, who understand and accept that their learning success is a result of effort, and that failure can be overtaken with greater effort and better use of strategies. Learners who are interested in the learning tasks and the learning outcomes for their own sake, and who focus on learning outcomes rather than performance outcomes (Dweck, 1986) display increased motivation.

Research has also revealed the crucial importance of the teacher in fostering student motivation. Dörnyei underlined the fact that “teacher skills in motivating learners should be seen as central to teaching effectiveness”, and expressed dissatisfaction with the lack of relevant practical teaching strategies, arguing that educational-oriented motivation articles in the 1990s “typically contained summaries of relevant classroom-specific motives [but did not offer] a sufficiently serviceable guide to practitioners.” He therefore designed a set of “Ten Commandments for Motivating Language Learners” (1998: 131)

1. Set a personal example with your own behaviour.2. Create a pleasant, relaxed atmosphere in the classroom.3. Present the task properly.4. Develop a good relationship with the learners.5. Increase the learner’s linguistic self-confidence.6. Make the language classes interesting.7. Promote learner autonomy.8. Personalise the learning process.9. Increase the learners’ goal-orientedness.10.Familiarise learners with the target language culture.

He was not the only researcher who has endeavoured to provide practitioners with meaningful advice. Oxford and Shearin (1996:139) also offer practical suggestions for teachers:

1. Teachers can identify why students are studying the new language. Teachers can find out actual motivations (motivation survey). Information on motivation can be passed on to the next class in a portfolio. Teachers can determine which parts of L2 learning are especially valuable for the

students.2. Teachers can help shape students’ beliefs about success and failure in L2 learning.

Students can learn to have realistic but challenging goals. Teachers can learn to accept diversity in the way students establish and meet their goals,

based on differences in learning styles.3. Teachers can help students improve motivation by showing that L2 learning can be an

exciting mental challenge, a career enhancer, a vehicle to cultural awareness and friendship and a key to world peace.

4. Teachers can make the L2 classroom a welcoming, positive place where psychological needs

are met and where language anxiety is kept to a minimum.5. Teachers can urge students to develop their own intrinsic rewards through positive self-talk,

guided self-evaluation, and mastery of specific goals, rather than comparison with other students. Teachers can thus promote a sense of greater self-efficacy, increasing motivation to continue learning the L2. (Adapted from Oxford & Shearin (1996:139)

It nevertheless true that teachers are left to rely on suggestions and contribute themselves to the enhancement of students’ motivation. Knowing one’s students’ own needs and addressing them accordingly is more important than resorting to some ‘recipes’ provided by others. It is important for practitioners to make room for motivation as an instructional goal when designing and implementing their syllabi.

Attitudes and BeliefsAnother important facet of the learning process is that of students’ attitudes to learning and the

perceptions (and beliefs) which determine them. These may have “a profound influence on … learning behaviour” (Cotterall, 1995b: 195) and on learning outcomes (Reid & Hresko, 1982), due to the fact that successful learners develop insightful beliefs about language learning processes, their own abilities and the use of effective learning strategies (Anstey, 1988), which have a facilitative effect on learning. Successful students tend to develop a more active and autonomous attitude that allows them to take charge of their learning. Conversely, mistaken or uninformed beliefs about language learning may be conducive to dependence on less effective strategies, resulting in indifference toward learning, poor cognitive performance (Reid & Hresko, 1982; Anstey, 1988), classroom anxiety (Horwitz et al. 1986) and a negative attitude to autonomy (Victori & Lockhart, 1995: 225).

It is important that teachers recognise and respect students’ attitudes, beliefs, and expectations and help them overcome any harmful perceptions and obstacles (Mantle-Bromley, 1995: 383), as well as enhancing students’ awareness of their personal weaknesses and strengths and of their task- and strategic knowledge (Wenden, 1987b; Gradman & Hanania, 1992; Victori, 1992). It has been proved that students’ beliefs which differ from those of the teacher can lead to frustration, dissatisfaction with the course, unwillingness to perform communicative activities, and to lack of confidence in the teacher, at the same time prejudicing achievement.

There have been numerous definitions given to attitudes and beliefs, starting from dictionary definitions to those given by psychologists and education researchers. According to Webster’s Revised Unabridged Dictionary (1913), “attitude is seen as “a complex mental orientation involving beliefs and feelings and values and dispositions to act in certain ways”, whereas Collins Cobuild Student’s Dictionary states that: “Your attitude to something is the way you think and feel about it”. Psychological theories on attitudes refer to an evaluative, emotional reaction (i.e. the degree of like or dislike associated with the attitudinal object) comprising three components: affect, cognition2, and behaviour3, these components undergoing change when there is “dissonance” or disagreement between them (Rajecki 1990; Zimbardo & Lieppe 1991).

By beliefs we generally understand “mental constructions of experience” (Sigel, 1985: 351, cited in White 1999:443) that are held to be true and that guide behaviour (White 1999:443). Beliefs about language learning (metacognitive knowledge, according to Flavell 1979) represent “general assumptions that students hold about themselves as learners, about factors influencing language learning and about the nature of language learning and teaching” (Victori & Lockhart 1995:224), and reflection on these beliefs has been termed ‘metacognition’ by cognitive psychologists, though the definition of this concept is still under debate (Brown et al. 1983).Research into the relationship between attitudes and second language achievement was carried out as early as the 1950s by Gardner and Lambert, and later by Schumann (1975), who found a number

2 What a person knows about the attitudinal object (including beliefs).3 Intentions or actions related to the attitudinal object.

of contributory factors: a. language shock (leading to feelings of dissatisfaction, frustration or guilt); b. culture shock (resulting in feelings of alienation or anxiety and rejection of native speaker

values); c. language stress (shame and loss of self-esteem resulting from a perceived deficiency in

language); and i) anxiety (due to the infantile persona necessarily projected by the language learner).

Sauvignon (1976) points out that teachers also have attitudes and beliefs about language learning, and that these affect their teaching:

Not until we have taken a hard critical look at the attitudes and motivation of teachers, both individually and as a profession, will we be ready to determine what obstacles lie in the way of creating the kinds of learning environments which would be most helpful to our students. (Sauvignon, 1976: 296)

At the same time it was found that students have different needs, preferences, beliefs, learning styles, and educational backgrounds, and that imposition of change upon these factors can lead to negative reactions, although the importance of student awareness of, and reflection on language learning beliefs (metacognitive knowledge), learning styles, learning preferences and expectations has only recently begun to receive attention in second language research.Wenden (1991b: 12-3) stated that adults and children form “self-schemata” concerning capabilities and limitations, degree of personal control over academic achievement, reasons for success and failure at different tasks, and expectancies for the future, which influence how they approach a problem. These schemata and other beliefs about language learning have various origins:

a. the mother culture; b. the family; c. classroom/social peers; d. repetitive experiences; and e. self-fulfilling (often negative) prophecies. They are often related to past experiences, but they also contribute to future behaviour,

supportive beliefs helping to overcome problems and thus sustaining motivation, and negative beliefs (including negative teacher beliefs) contributing to decreased motivation. Students are also immediately influenced by their perception of success in learning and by their levels of expectancy, realistically high levels helping to build confidence, and low (or unrealistically high) expectations helping to build incompetence (Puchta, 1999: 257). Research on self-esteem has demonstrated “a clear link between an individual’s judgement of his or her own competence and that individual’s actual performance on school-related tasks” (Hagen et al. 1982), although Cotterall (1999: 510) sees a need for further research into learner beliefs about ability, self-efficacy and self-esteem.

It is therefore essential for us to pay attention to people’s variables, such as intentions, attributions, expectancies, perceptions and beliefs about learning abilities, which learners bring to the classroom. We need to design and implement our lessons on the language-learning process which would incorporate attitude-change methods. If need be, we should change curricula in order to maintain and improve students’ attitudes and beliefs. It is essential that he help students get rid of ineffective and harmful preconceived notions on language learning. Specialists have suggested ways in which this can be carried out. Thus, Bassano (1986: 15) offers teachers six steps towards dealing with student beliefs:

a. become aware of students’ past classroom experiences and their assumptions about language learning;

b. build students’ confidence; c. begin where the students are and move slowly; d. show them achievement; e. allow for free choice as much as possible; and

f. become aware of the students’ interests and concerns, their goals and objectives.Furthermore, Morgan (1993) considers that four aspects of classroom persuasion should be borne in mind when attempting to change attitudes:

a. learning content should require active learner involvement; b. the classroom environment should be one of “change or novelty” (1993:73); c. students need to struggle with complex material and reach their own conclusions; and d. students should become aware of their attitudes toward language and culture (cf. Mantle-

Bromley, 1995: 373-4).All these ideas are valuable for the practitioner whose aim is that of changing students’ counter-productive beliefs and attitudes towards language learning.

Anxiety It has been confirmed by research that ‘language anxiety’ exists indeed and that it has a

considerable effect on second language learning (MacIntyre and Gardner, 1991b). It has been underlined that there is some reciprocity between anxiety and proficiency, such that “even in optimum conditions, students can experience destructive forms of anxiety” (Reid 1999: 297).

Nevertheless, this effect is complex and difficult to appraise (Phillips 1992:2), although research (and the experience of teachers) points out that language learning contexts are especially susceptible to anxiety arousal (MacIntyre and Gardner, 1989; MacIntyre, 1995: 90). Campbell and Ortiz (1991: 159) reckoned that up to half of all language students experience debilitating levels of language anxiety; whereas Horwitz (Horwitz et al. 1986) assessed that language anxiety can determine students to defer language study or to change their majors. For this reason, language anxiety has been greatly researched, as specialists believe that an understanding of its causes and investigation into how to reduce language anxiety will lead to improved learner performance and learning satisfaction by releasing tensions and diminishing demands on cognitive processing space (Eysenck 1979). Oxford (1999) also investigated whether language anxiety is a short-term or lasting characteristic, whether it is harmful or beneficial, which factors correlate with language anxiety, and how anxiety can be identified in the language classroom.

In order to address the issue of anxiety one has to pay heed to psychological aspects of learning. Psychological definitions of anxiety refer to a “transitory emotional state or condition characterised by feelings of tension and apprehension and heightened autonomic nervous system activity” (Spielberger 1972: 24), a state which can have both negative and positive effects, and which motivates and facilitates as well as disrupts and inhibits cognitive actions such as learning.

As far as second language learning is concerned, by language anxiety we understand “the apprehension experienced when a situation requires the use of a second language with which the individual is not fully proficient”, this apprehension being characterised by “derogatory self-related cognitions …, feelings of apprehension, and physiological responses such as increased heart rate” (1993a: 5). Such feelings of tension and apprehension related to second language contexts are also described by Williams & Burden (1997: 92) who underline that anxiety is “highly situation specific and itself affected by a number of other factors”

Liebert and Morris (1967) mentioned “worry” and “emotionality” among cognitive and affective components of anxiety. The former was described by Sarason (1986) as “distressing preoccupations and concerns about impending events” (1986:21), often taking the form of distraction, self-related cognition such as excessive self-evaluation, worry over potential failure, and concern over the opinions of others (Eysenck 1979). Such outcomes often affect task performance negatively, which has itself been the subject of much research into language anxiety, results of which suggest that anxiety is conducive to cognitive interference in performing specific tasks (Schwarzer 1986).

Three related performance anxieties were identified by Horwitz et al. (1986:127):a) communication apprehension;

b) test anxiety; c) fear of negative evaluation.

Eysenck (1979) offers a reconceptualization of anxiety in terms of this interference, stating that the anxious students have their attention shared between task-related cognition and self-related cognition:

worry and other task-irrelevant cognitive activities associated with anxiety always impair the quality of performance. The major reason for this is that the task-irrelevant information ... competes with task-relevant information for space in the processing system. (Eysenck 1979: 364)

MacIntyre & Gardner (1991a) assert that the lower the language learning stage, the less anxiety is to be found. This tends to develop later, if language learning experiences have been negative. Given the tendency of language classrooms to promote anxiety (Horwitz et al. 1986), promoting a low-stress language learning environment must play an important role in designing and conducting language courses. This end may be achieved by encouraging realistic expectations about accuracy and errors (Foss & Reitzel 1988), offering training in affective strategies, to help students manage anxiety and improve performance (Oxford & Crookall 1989), reassuring students that they are not alone in their affective reactions and that these feelings are normal, and showing that the teacher/evaluator understands the tension caused by being anxious not to appear anxious to the class/teacher.

Apparently, the most negative effects of anxiety upon learner performance are those of course grades and standardised proficiency tests. It has been suggested, nevertheless, that more subtle effects of language anxiety on specific processes involved in language acquisition and communication should also be studied, such as the development of oral skills, even though students show most interest in developing their ability to communicate verbally in the target language (Lindenau, 1987).

Another element that needs to be taken into consideration is that of learner-perceptions. These are extremely important in the matter of reducing language anxiety, and studies of students’ negative correlations between anxiety and output quality indicate that anxious students have more difficulty expressing themselves and tend to underestimate their level of ability (“self-derogation”) compared with more relaxed students (“self-enhancement”) (MacIntyre & Gardner 1994). As a result, teachers need to identify anxious students (Horwitz et al. 1986:128) as well as any elements of the classroom environment which might lead to this reaction.

In conclusion, language educators should strive to promote a non-threatening learning environment and “user-friendly” oral exams which students could prepare for well in advance, in order to prevent negative interactions between language anxiety and other personality variables such as learning styles, motivation, and personality types. Teachers themselves could eventually discover and apply the most effective techniques in controlling anxiety.

Learning Styles Although there has been some overlapping between learning styles and learning strategies in

terms of definitions (Reid, 1995: viii) learning styles have gained their rightful place in any review of affect in the classroom, having their origin in habitual (in addition to biological) attributes, and thus being prone to change and extension (Davidman, 1981):

[Learning strategies are] … external skills that students use, often consciously, to improve their learning … that students can be taught [and] that can enhance or expand their existing learning styles. Learning styles, in contrast, are internally based characteristics, often not perceived or used consciously, that are the basis for the intake and understanding of new information … students can identify their preferred learning styles and stretch those styles by examining and practising various learning strategies. (Reid, 1995: viii)

It has been suggested that learning (i.e. “the process whereby knowledge is created through the transformation of experience”, Kolb 1984: 38) is influenced by learning styles, and that in the case of students capable to employ multiple learning styles, this effect is positive (Cronbach & Snow 1977; Stewart 1981; Eliason 1989: 27). Reid (1995: xiii) advances a number of statements for learning styles:

1. every person, students and teacher alike, has a learning style and learning strengths and weaknesses;

2. learning styles exist on wide continuums, although they are often described as opposites;

3. learning styles are value-neutral; that is, no one style is better than others; 4. students must be encouraged to ‘stretch’ their learning styles so that they will be more

empowered in a variety of learning situations; 5. students’ learning strategies are often linked to their learning styles; 6. teachers should allow their students to become aware of their learning strengths and

weaknesses. (Adapted from Reid 1995: xiii)In discussing learning styles it has been agreed that cognition, affect and personality are equally important. Reid’s (1995: viii) has defined them as “an individual’s natural, habitual, and preferred way(s) of absorbing, processing, and retaining new information and skills”; Keefe (1979: 4) has distinguished “cognitive, affective and physiological traits that are relatively stable indicators of how learners perceive, interact with, and respond to the learning environment”; Scarcella (1990: 114) has referred to “cognitive and interactional patterns which affect the ways in which students perceive, remember, and think”, whereas Ehrman & Oxford (1990: 311) speak of “preferred or habitual patterns of mental functioning and dealing with new information”. Reid’s has offered a comprehensive summary of all these definitions, identifying three major learning styles:

1. Cognitive Learning Styles: Field-Independent/Dependent Learning Styles (FI/D); Analytic/Global Learning Styles; Reflective/Impulsive Learning Styles.

2. Sensory Styles: Perceptual Learning Styles (Auditory Learners, Visual Learners, Tactile Learners, Kinaesthetic Learners and Haptic Learners); Environmental Learning Styles (Physical Learners, Social Learners).

3. Personality Learning Styles (Affective/Temperament Styles): Myers-Briggs Temperament Styles (Extroversion/Introversion, Sensing/Perception, Thinking/ Feeling, Judging/Perceiving); Tolerance of Ambiguity Styles (Tolerant Learners/ Intolerant Learners); Right-and Left-Hemisphere Learners.

Another important factor in learning styles can be the tolerance of ambiguity, by which we understand the willingness to adapt to apparently ambiguous situations or ideas - cf. Ausburn & Ausburn (1978)

Different aspects were taken into consideration by different researchers. Thus, the concept of cognitive style mapping was investigated by Hill (1971), whereas Witkin, Moore, Oltman, Goodenough, Friedman, Owen, & Raskin (1977) wrote about field independent (analytic) versus field dependent (global) approaches to experiencing the environment and processing information.

Similarly, Dunn & Dunn (1979) identify perceptual learning modalities: visual learning: reading, studying charts; auditory learning: listening to lectures, audiotapes, etc.; kinaesthetic learning: experiential learning - total physical involvement with a

learning situation; tactile learning: “hands-on” learning, such as building models or doing laboratory

experiments.Further categorisations of learning modalities were provided by Kagan (1966) and Kagan &

Messer (1975), who described a conceptual tempo (reflectivity versus impulsivity in learning), by

Gregorc (1979a; 1979b), who proposed concrete sequential, abstract sequential, abstract random, and concrete random learning styles, and by Kolb (1976, 1984), who also identified four adaptive learning modes constituting a natural learning sequence of cyclic and interactive stages, continuing at ever deeper and more complex levels: concrete experience (CE), reflective observation (RO), abstract conceptualisation (AC) and active experimentation (AE).Learners are differing individuals and this is what we should never overlook. Eliason appropriately concluded on learning styles and their implications for language learning and teaching:

… we may very well find that the most important outcome for learning-styles assessment and information dissemination is not whether we label ourselves and our students as visual or kinaesthetic, … or as accommodators or divergers, but rather whether we are able to acknowledge and celebrate the various types and processes we and our students bring to the classroom, while continuing to both accommodate and diverge. (Eliason 1989: 32)

After all, learner styles are all a matter of awareness and acceptance. It is widely accepted now that “the perceptual and social activity of the learner, and particularly the verbal and non-verbal interaction in which the learner engages, are central to an understanding of learning … They are learning in a fundamental way”(Van Lier, 2000: 246).

As a conclusion to this section, we may reassert that the classroom as a learning environment contains learners with their own personal histories, values, assumptions, beliefs, rights, duties, obligations and learning styles, and the learning task (or whatever unit of learning is chosen) can only be a question of perceiving and using linguistic affordances (Van Lier 2000:252) as appropriate, stimulated by a climate of cooperative social interaction which “produces new, elaborate, advanced psychological processes that are unavailable to the organism working in isolation” (Vygotsky, 1989: 61).

The learning environmentIt has been rightfully stated that “without a positive learning atmosphere, students may well

gain little or nothing from new curricular infusions”. (Mantle-Bromley, 1995: 383) Besides regarding the learner as a thinking individual, educators have also drawn attention to the necessity of a constructive learning “climate” (Fraser, 1986: 182) as a valuable means to learning and a worthwhile end in itself. Legutke & Thomas (1991) underlined the importance of trust in creating this “constructive” environment:

A learning environment conducive to growth includes an atmosphere of trust, forms of interaction between partners, learning situations which stimulate encounters, and above all, learning arrangements which allow for creative ways of exploration by making contact with both the world inside the learner and the world outside. (Legutke & Thomas 1991:43)

Comparatively, Sano et al. (1984) consider learning as dependent on:… warm-hearted interaction between teachers and learners, as well as among learners themselves. This friendly interaction is, in our opinion, the most essential factor in successful language learning. (Sano et al, 1984: 171)

Pine & Boy (1977) have drawn a list of factors that influence and facilitate learning as far as the classroom environment is concerned. According to them, learning is facilitated in an atmosphere …:

1. … which encourages people to be active; 2. … that facilitates the individual’s discovery of the personal meaning of ideas;3. … that emphasises the uniquely personal and subjective nature of learning;4. … in which difference is good and desirable;5. … that consistently recognises the right to make mistakes;6. … that tolerates ambiguity;

7. … in which evaluation is a co-operative process with emphasis on self-evaluation;8. … which encourages openness of self rather than concealment of self;9. … in which people are encouraged to trust in themselves as well as in external sources;10. … in which people feel they are respected;11. … in which people feel they are accepted;12. … which allows confrontation.13. … in which the teacher creates conditions by which he loses the teaching function.14. … in which instruction is carefully personalised in an attempt to meet the individual needs,

interests, and abilities of students.Moreover, Pine & Boy (1977) also stress that learning is facilitated in an environment …:

15. … in which the materials provided are perceived as meaningful and relevant to the student;16. … in which there is freedom to peruse personal interests, raise questions, make decisions,

explore, and discover;17. … in which provocative interest centres and materials that demand interaction and constant

investigation are provided to help bring about self-initiated learning;18. … in which an attitude of competitiveness need not exist;19. … in which the student has the freedom to make mistakes and still feel competent;20. … in which opportunities are provided for the student to grow socially, emotionally, and

intellectually though working as an individual, and as part of a wide variety of group and peer learning situations;

21. … in which respect, trust, love, and concern for one another are nurtured;22. … in which the teacher’s role is facilitator of learning.

ConclusionWe have reviewed some of the affective factors that influence the language learning process in

order to understand how negative emotions can be overcome, since anxiety, fear, stress, anger, depression, and negative reactions can harm the learning environment, making teaching techniques useless.

As Dickinson (1987: 26) has noted, a self-instructional mode can contribute to control affective factors through fostering empathy, reducing inhibition, and increasing self-assessment and individualisation.

Teachers should be strive to promote learning environments “which are cognitively and affectively expanding, … which enable the learner to become a more adequate and knowledgeable person” (Pine & Boy, 1977: iii), and which acknowledge the place of affect in that process. Furthermore, affective approach to teaching should be adopted in order to develop a truly reflective teaching practice. According to Stanley (1999) this is possible, as:

1. Teachers tend to have emotional reactions during teaching-learning situations.2. Teachers are the agents of their reflective processes.3. Teachers learn reflection through relationship. (Stanley, 1999: 123)

Teachers have to raise student awareness of affective factors and then allow student to express their needs, beliefs and perceptions. This student-centred approach entails a learning climate of trust and clarity, which should be considered as an indispensable goal, governing teachers’ choices and preceding the learning process, though depending on this very process for its achievement.

Finally, this humanistic view on teaching and learning presupposes that teachers turn into language-resource counsellors who will effectively contribute to students’ education towards the betterment of human condition.