Main Article Content
Motivation has been widely considered one of the most influential variables in the field of second language learning. Motivation may vary throughout the years, even within the duration of a single language class, and this might occur due to different factors, such as the choice of tasks or the activity type (i.e., collaborative or individual). These two factors have not been investigated in depth with young learners in foreign language settings, and from a task-based perspective. Thus, this paper addresses this gap, and explores the potential changes in motivation of 64 Spanish young learners of English as a foreign language who worked on a number of dictogloss tasks in pairs and individually over the span of a school year. Data was collected several times by means of different tools that measured students’ general and more specific task motivation, as well as their attitudes towards individual/pair work. The findings revealed that, overall, these children’s motivation was high and consolidated with time, while their level of anxiety decreased. Their attitudes towards the dictogloss were positive from the beginning to the end of the school year, and more so when they carried out the task in pairs. These findings support the benefits of collaborative work, and the dictogloss, as an appropriate task that engages children in their learning of a foreign language.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
1.1 The Author hereby warrants that he/she is the owner of all the copyright and other intellectual property rights in the Work and that, within the scope of the present Agreement, the paper does not infringe the legal rights of another person. The owner of the copyright work also warrants that he/she is the sole and original creator thereof and that is not bound by any legal constraints in regard to the use or sale of the work.
1.2. The Publisher warrants that is the owner of the PRESSto platform for open access journals, hereinafter referred to as the PRESSto Platform.
2. The Author grants the Publisher non-exclusive and free of charge license to unlimited use worldwide over an unspecified period of time in the following areas of exploitation:
2.1. production of multiple copies of the Work produced according to the specific application of a given technology, including printing, reproduction of graphics through mechanical or electrical means (reprography) and digital technology;
2.2. marketing authorisation, loan or lease of the original or copies thereof;
2.3. public performance, public performance in the broadcast, video screening, media enhancements as well as broadcasting and rebroadcasting, made available to the public in such a way that members of the public may access the Work from a place and at a time individually chosen by them;
2.4. inclusion of the Work into a collective work (i.e. with a number of contributions);
2.5. inclusion of the Work in the electronic version to be offered on an electronic platform, or any other conceivable introduction of the Work in its electronic version to the Internet;
2.6. dissemination of electronic versions of the Work in its electronic version online, in a collective work or independently;
2.7. making the Work in the electronic version available to the public in such a way that members of the public may access the Work from a place and at a time individually chosen by them, in particular by making it accessible via the Internet, Intranet, Extranet;
2.8. making the Work available according to appropriate license pattern Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) as well as another language version of this license or any later version published by Creative Commons.
3. The Author grants the Publisher permission to reproduce a single copy (print or download) and royalty-free use and disposal of rights to compilations of the Work and these compilations.
4. The Author grants the Publisher permission to send metadata files related to the Work, including to commercial and non-commercial journal-indexing databases.
5. The Author represents that, on the basis of the license granted in the present Agreement, the Publisher is entitled and obliged to:
5.1. allow third parties to obtain further licenses (sublicenses) to the Work and to other materials, including derivatives thereof or compilations made, based on or including the Work, whereas the provisions of such sub-licenses will be the same as with the Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) Creative Commons sub-license or another language version of this license, or any later version of this license published by Creative Commons;
5.2. make the Work available to the public in such a way that members of the public may access the Work from a place and at a time individually chosen by them, without any technological constraints;
5.3. appropriately inform members of the public to whom the Work is to be made available about sublicenses in such a way as to ensure that all parties are properly informed (appropriate informing messages).
6. Because of the royalty-free provision of services of the Author (resulting from the scope of obligations stipulated in the present Agreement), the Author shall not be entitled to any author’s fee due and payable on the part of the Publisher (no fee or royalty is payable by the Publisher to the Author).
7.1. In the case of third party claims or actions for indemnity against the Publisher owing to any infractions related to any form of infringement of intellectual property rights protection, including copyright infringements, the Author is obliged to take all possible measures necessary to protect against these claims and, when as a result of legal action, the Publisher, or any third party licensed by the Publisher to use the Work, will have to abandon using the Work in its entirety or in part or, following a court ruling in a legal challenge, to pay damages to a third party, whatever the legal basis
7.2. The Author will immediately inform the Publisher about any damage claims related to intellectual property infringements, including the author’s proprietary rights pertaining to a copyrighted work, filed against the Author. of liability, the Author is obliged to redress the damage resulting from claims made by third party, including costs and expenditures incurred in the process.
7.3. To all matters not settled herein provisions of the Polish Civil Code and the Polish Copyright and Related Rights Act shall apply.
- Al Khalil, M. K. (2016). Insights from measurement of task-related motivation. In A. Mackey & E. Marsden (Eds.), Advancing methodology and practice: The IRIS repository of instruments for research into second languages (pp. 243-262). New York, NY & London: Routledge.
- Baleghizadeh, S., & Farhesh, S. (2014). The impact of pair work on EFL learners’ motivation. MEXTESOL Journal, 38(3), 1-11.
- Calzada, A., & García Mayo, M. P. (2020). Child EFL learners’ attitudes towards a collaborative writing task. Language Teaching for Young Learners, 2(1), 52-72.
- Cenoz, J. (2009). Towards multilingual education: Basque educational research from an international perspective. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
- Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
- Cohen, A. D., & Dörnyei, Z. (2002). Focus on the language learner: Motivation, styles and strategies. In N. Schmitt (Ed.), An introduction to applied linguistics (pp. 170-190). London: Arnold.
- Council of Europe. (2001). Common European framework of reference for languages: Learning, teaching, assessment. Cambridge: Press Syndicate of the University of Cambridge.
- Csizér, K., & Kormos, J. (2009). Learning experiences, selves and motivated learning behaviour: A comparative analysis of structural models for Hungarian secondary and university learners of English. In Z. Dörnyei & E. Ushioda (Eds.), Motivation, language identity and the L2 self (pp. 98-119). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
- Díaz Vega, L. (2016). The effects of collaborative vs. individual work on EFL written texts: Aspects of quality and engagement (Unpublished master thesis). Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Spain.
- Doiz, A., Lasagabaster, D., & Sierra, J. M. (2014a). CLIL and motivation: The effect of individual and contextual variables. The Language Learning Journal, 42(2), 209-224.
- Doiz, A., Lasagabaster, D., & Sierra, J. M. (2014b). Giving voice to the students: What (de)motivates them in CLIL classes? In D. Lasagabaster, A. Doiz, & J. M. Sierra (Eds.), Motivation and foreign language learning: From theory to practice (pp. 117-138). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
- Dörnyei, Z. (2007). Research methods in applied linguistics: Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methodologies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- Dörnyei, Z. (2009). The L2 motivational self system. In Z. Dörnyei (Ed.), Motivation, language identity and the L2 self (pp. 9-42). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
- Dörnyei, Z. (2019). Task motivation: What makes an L2 task engaging? In Z. Wen & M. J. Ahmadian (Eds.), Researching L2 task performance and pedagogy: In honor of Peter Skehan (pp. 53-66). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
- Dörnyei, Z., Csizér, K., & Németh, N. (2006). Motivation, language attitudes and globalization: A Hungarian perspective. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
- Dörnyei, Z., & Kormos, J. (2000). The role of individual and social variables in oral task performance. Language Teaching Research, 4, 275-300.
- Dörnyei, Z., MacIntyre, P. D., & Henry, A. (2015). Introduction: applying complex dynamic systems principles to empirical research on L2 motivation. In Z. Dörnyei, P. D. MacIntyre, & A. Henry (Eds.), Motivational dynamics in language learning (pp. 1-7). Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters.
- Dörnyei, Z., & Ryan, S. (2015). The psychology of the language learner revisited. New York/London: Routledge.
- Ellis, R. (2003). Task-based language learning and teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- Fenyvesi, K. (2018). English learning motivation of young learners in Danish primary schools. Language Teaching Research, 24, 690-713. http://doi.org/10.1177/1362168818804835
- Fernández Dobao, A. (2012). Collaborative writing tasks in the L2 classroom: Comparing group, pair, and individual work. Journal of Second Language Writing, 21, 40-58.
- Gardner, R. C. (1985). Social psychology and second language learning: The role of attitudes and motivation. London: Edward Arnold.
- Garrett, P., & Gallego, L. (2014). International universities and implications of internationalisation for minority languages: Views from university students in Catalonia and Wales. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 35(4), 361-375.
- Guiraud, P. (1960). Problèmes et méthodes de la statistique linguistique. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.
- Henry, A. (2009). Gender differences in compulsory school pupils’ L2 self-concepts: A longitudinal study. System, 37, 177-193.
- Julkunen, K. (2001). Situation- and task-specific motivation in foreign language learning. In Z. Dörnyei & R. Schmidt (Eds.), Motivation and second language acquisition (pp. 29-42). Honolulu, HI: University of Hawaii Press.
- Kim, Y. (2008). The contribution of collaborative and individual tasks to the acquisition of L2 vocabulary. Modern Language Journal, 92(1), 114-130.
- Kormos, J., & Dörnyei, Z. (2004). The interaction of linguistic and motivational variables in second language task performance. Zeitschrift für Interkulturellen Fremdsprachenunterricht, 9(2), 1-19.
- Larsen-Freeman, D. (2015). Ten “lessons” from complex dynamic systems theory: What is on offer. In Z. Dörnyei, P. D. MacIntyre, & A. Henry (Eds.), Motivational dynamics in language learning (pp. 11-19). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
- Larsen-Freeman, D. & Cameron, L. (2008). Complex systems and applied linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- Lasagabaster, D. (2000). Three languages and three linguistic models in the Basque educational system. In J. Cenoz & U. Jessner (Eds.), English in Europe: The acquisition of a third language (pp. 179-197). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
- Mihaljević Djigunović, J. (2012). Dynamics of learner affective development in early FLL. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 2(2), 159-178.
- Mihaljević Djigunović, J., & Lopriore, L. (2011). The learner: Do individual differences matter? In J. Enever (Ed.), ELLiE Early language learning in Europe (pp. 43-59). London: The British Council.
- Muñoz, C. (2017). Tracing trajectories of young learners: Ten years of school English learning. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 37, 168-184.
- Nassaji, H., & Tian, J. (2010). Collaborative and individual output tasks and their effects on learning English phrasal verbs. Language Teaching Research, 14, 397-419.
- Nikolov, M. (1999). Why do you learn English? Because the teacher is short: A study of Hungarian children’s foreign language learning motivation. Language Teaching Research, 3, 33-56.
- Oliver, R. (1998). Negotiation of meaning in child interactions. Modern Language Journal, 82(3), 372-386.
- Poupore, G. (2013). Task motivation in process: A complex systems perspective. Canadian Modern Language Review, 69(1), 91-116.
- Shak, J., & Gardner, S. (2008). Young learner perspectives on four focus-on-form tasks. Language Teaching Research, 12(3), 387-408.
- Storch, N. (1999). Are two heads better than one? Pair work and grammatical accuracy. System, 27, 363-374.
- Storch, N., & Wigglesworth, G. (2007). Writing tasks: Comparing individual and collaborative writing. In M. P. García Mayo (Ed.), Investigating tasks in formal language learning (pp. 157-177). London: Multilingual Matters.
- UCLES University of Cambridge Local Examinations Syndicate. (2017). Cambridge English: Flyers (YLE Flyers). Retrieved from https://www.cambridgeenglish.org/exams-and-tests/flyers/
- Wajnryb, R. (1990). Grammar dictation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- Wigglesworth, G., & Storch, N. (2009). Pair versus individual writing: Effects on fluency, complexity and accuracy. Language Testing, 26, 445-466.
- Williams, M., Burden, R., & Lanvers, U. (2002). ‘French is the language of love and stuff’: Student perceptions of issues related to motivation in learning a foreign language. British Educational Research Journal, 28, 503-528.