Keywords
dynamic systems
learner differences
the self
How to Cite
Number of views: 1018
Number of downloads: 684
Abstract
This article explores the potential offered by complexity theories for understanding language learners’ sense of self and attempts to show how the self might usefully be conceived of as a complex dynamic system. Rather than presenting empirical findings, the article discusses existent research on the self and aims at outlining a conceptual perspective that may inform future studies into the self and possibly other individual learner differences. The article concludes by critically considering the merits of a complexity perspective but also reflecting on the challenges it poses for research.References
Atkinson, D. (2010). Extended, embodied cognition and second language acquisition. Applied Linguistics, 31(5), 599-622.
Arnold, J., & Brown, H. D. (1999). A map of the terrain. In J. Arnold (Ed.), Affect in language learning (pp. 1-27). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bandura, A. (1989). Human agency in social cognitive theory. American Psychologist, 44(9), 1175-1184.
Bandura, A. (2008). Toward an agentic theory of the self. In H. W. Marsh, R. G. Craven, & D. M. McInerney (Eds.), Self-processes, learning, and enabling human potential: Dynamic new approaches (pp. 15-49). Charlotte, NV.: Information Age Publishing.
Barabási, A.-L. (2003). Linked. New York: Plume Books.
Barabási, A.-L. (2009). Scale-free networks: A decade and beyond. Science, 325, 412-413.
Barcelos, A. M. F. (2003). Researching beliefs about SLA: A critical review. In P. Kalaja, & A. M. F. Barcelos (Eds.), Beliefs about SLA: New research approaches (pp. 7-33). New York: Springer.
Block, D. (2003). The social turn in second language acquisition. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
Block, D. (2007). Second language identities. London: Continuum.
Brinthaupt, T. M., & Lipka, R. P. (1992). Introduction. In T. M. Brinthaupt, & R. P. Lipka (Eds.), The self: Definitional and methodological issues (pp. 1-11). Albany: State of University of New York Press.
Brown, J. D. (1986). Evaluations of self and others: Self-enhancement biases in social judgements. Social Cognition, 4(4), 353-376.
Buchholz, C. (2008). Complexity of self-reflection. Saarbrücken: VDM Verlag Dr. Müller.
Clément, R., Noels, K. A., & Deneault, B. (2001). Interethnic contact, identity, and psychological adjustment: The mediating and moderating roles of communication. Journal of Social Issues, 57(3), 559-577.
Cohen, A. D. (2003). The learner’s side of foreign language learning: Where do styles, strategies, and tasks meet? International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 41(4), 279-291.
Cohen, A. D. (Forthcoming). Strategies: The interface of styles, strategies, and motivation on tasks. In S. Mercer, S. Ryan, & M. Williams (Eds.), Psychology for language learning. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Cohen, Y., & Norst, M. J. (1989). Fear, dependence and loss of self-esteem: Affective barriers in second language learning among adults. RELC Journal, 20(2), 61-77.
Damasio, A. (1994). Descartes’ error: Emotion, reason, and the human brain. New York: Putman.
Davis, B., & Sumara, D. (2006). Complexity and education: Inquires into learning, teaching and research. Mahwah, NJ.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Dewaele, J.M. (2011). Reflections on the emotional and psychological aspects of foreign language learning and use. Anglistik, 22(1), 23-42.
Dörnyei, Z. (2005). The psychology of the language learner. Hillsdale, NJ.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Dörnyei, Z. (2009). Individual differences: Interplay of learner characteristics and learning environment. Language Learning, 59(1), 230-248.
Dörnyei, Z., & Ushioda, E. (Eds.). (2009). Motivation, language identity and the L2 self. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Dörnyei, Z., & Ushioda., E. (Eds.). (2011). Teaching and researching motivation. (2nd ed.). Harlow: Pearson.
Funder, D. C. (2001). The really, really fundamental attribution error. Psychological Inquiry, 12(1), 21-23.
Gao, X. (2010). Strategic language learning: The roles of agency and context. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Gillham, B. (2000). Case study research methods. London: Continuum.
Graham, S. (2007). Learner strategies and self-efficacy: Making the connection. Language Learning Journal, 35(1), 81-93.
Gu, M. (2009). The discursive construction of second language learners’ motivation. Bern: Peter Lang.
Haggis, T. (2008). ‘Knowledge must be contextual’: Some possible implications of complexity and dynamic systems theories for educational research. In M. Mason (Ed.), Complexity theory and the philosophy of education (pp. 150-168). Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.
Hardy, L., & Moriarty, T. (2006). Shaping self-concept: The elusive importance effect. Journal of Personality, 74(2), 377-401.
Harter, S. (1999). The construction of the self: A developmental perspective. New York: Guildford Press.
Henry, A. (2009). Gender differences in compulsory school pupils’ L2 self-concepts: A longitudinal study. System, 37(2), 177-193.
Higgins, E. T. (1987). Self-discrepancy: A theory relating self and affect. Psychological Review, 94(3), 319-340.
Hormuth, S. E. (1990). The ecology of the self: Relocation and self-concept change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hosenfeld, C. (2003). Evidence of emergent beliefs of a second language learner: A diary study. In P. Kalaja, & A. M. F. Barcelos (Eds.), Beliefs about SLA: New research approaches (pp. 37-54). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Press.
Hsieh, P. P., & Schallert, D. L. (2008). Implications from self-efficacy and attribution theories for an understanding of undergraduates’ motivation in a foreign language course. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 33(4), 513-532.
Immordino-Yang, M. H., & Damasio, A. (2007). We feel, therefore we learn: The relevance of affective and social neuroscience to education. Mind, Brain and Education, 1(1), 3-10.
Lamb, M. (2009). Situating the L2 self: Two Indonesian school learners of English. In Z. Dörnyei, & E. Ushioda (Eds.), Motivation, language identity and the L2 self (pp. 229-247). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Larsen-Freeman, D., & Cameron, L. (2008). Complex systems and applied linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
LeDoux, J. (1998). The emotional brain. London: Phoenix.
Lewis, M. D. (2005). Bridging emotion theory and neurobiology through dynamic systems modelling. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 28(2), 169-194.
Lewontin, R. (1998). The evolution of cognition: Questions we will never answer. In D. Scarborough, & S. Sternberg (Eds.), An invitation to cognitive science, volume 4: Methods, models and conceptual issues (pp. 107-132). Cambridge, MA.: The MIT Press.
MacIntyre, P. D., MacKinnon, S. P., & Clément, R. (2009). The baby, the bathwater, and the future of language learning motivation research. In Z. Dörnyei, & E. Ushioda (Eds.), Motivation, language identity and the self (pp. 43-65). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
MacIntyre, P. D., Noels, K. A., & Moore, B. (2010). Perspectives on motivation in second language acquisition: Lessons from the Ryoanji garden. In M. T. Prior et al. (Eds.), Selected proceedings of the 2008 second language research forum (pp. 1-9). Somerville, MA.: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.
Markus, H., & Kunda, Z. (1986). Stability and malleability of the self-concept. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(4), 858-866.
Markus, H., & Wurf, E. (1987). The dynamic self-concept: A social-psychological perspective. Annual Review of Psychology, 38, 299-337.
Marsh, H. W. (1986a). Verbal and math self-concepts: An internal/external frame of reference model. American Educational Research Journal, 23(1), 129-149.
Marsh, H. W. (1986b). Self-serving effect (bias?) in academic attributions: Its relation to academic achievement and self-concept. Journal of Educational Psychology, 78(3), 190-200.
Marsh, H. W., & Shavelson, R. (1985). Self-concept: Its multifaceted, hierarchical structure. Educational Psychologist, 20(3), 107-123.
Marsh, K. L., Johnston, L., Richardson, M. J., & Schmidt, R. C. (2009). Toward a radically, embodied, embedded social psychology. European Journal of Social Psychology, 39, 1217-1225.
Mason, M. (2008). What is complexity theory and what are its implications for educational change? In M. Mason (Ed.), Complexity theory and the philosophy of education (pp. 32-45). Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.
McDonough, S. (2002). Applied linguistics in language education. London: Arnold.
Mercer, S. (2009). The dynamic nature of a tertiary learner’s foreign language self-concepts. In M. Pawlak (Ed.), New Perspectives on individual differences in language learning and teaching (pp. 205-220). Poznań – Kalisz: Adam Mickiewicz University Press.
Mercer, S. (2011). Towards an understanding of language learner self-concept. Dordrecht: Springer.
Mercer, S. (Forthcoming). Language learner self-concept: Complexity, continuity and change. System, 39(3).
Mills, N., Pajares, F., & Herron, C. (2007). Self-efficacy of college intermediate French students: Relation to achievement and motivation. Language Learning, 57(3), 417-442.
Morita, N. (2004). Negotiating participation and identity in second language academic communities. TESOL Quarterly, 38(4), 573-603.
Morrison, K. (2005). Structuration theory, habitus and complexity theory: Elective affinities or old wine in new bottles? British Journal of Sociology of Education, 26(3), 311-326.
Morrison, K. (2008). Educational philosophy and the challenge of complexity theory. In M. Mason (Ed.), Complexity theory and the philosophy of education (pp. 16-31). Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.
Norton, B. (2000). Identity and language learning: Gender, ethnicity and educational change. London: Longman.
Nowak, A., Vallacher, R. R., & Zochowski, M. (2005). The emergence of personality: Dynamic foundations of individual variation. Developmental Review, 25, 351-385.
Onorato, R. S., & Turner, J. C. (2004). Fluidity in the self-concept: The shift from the personal to social identity. European Journal of Social Psychology, 34(3), 257-278.
Pajares, F., & Schunk, D. H. (2005). Self-efficacy and self-concept beliefs. In H. W. Marsh, R. G. Craven, & D. M. McInerney (Eds.), International advances in self research volume 2 (pp. 95-121). Greenwich, Connecticut: Information Age Publishing.
Pawlak, M. (2009). Individual differences in language learning and teaching: Achievements, prospects and challenges. In M. Pawlak (Ed.), New perspectives on individual differences in language learning and teaching (pp. 5-31). Poznań – Kalisz: Adam Mickiewicz University Press.
Pelham, B. W. (1991). On confidence and consequence: The certainty and importance of self-knowledge. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60(4), 518-530.
Pelham, B. W., & Swann, W. B. (1989). From self-conceptions to self-worth: On the sources and structures of global self-esteem. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57(4), 672-680.
Pellegrino, V. A. (2005). Study abroad and second language use: Constructing the self. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Pintrich, P. R. (2003). A motivational science perspective on the role of student motivation in learning and teaching contexts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(4), 667-686.
Reeve, J. (2005). Understanding motivation and emotion. Hoboken, NJ.: Wiley and Sons.
Richardson, K. A., & Cilliers, P. (2001). What is complexity science? A view from different directions. Emergence, 3(1), 5-23.
Rubenfeld, S., Clément, R., Lussier, D., Lebrun, M., & Auger, R. (2006). Second language learning and cultural representations: Beyond competence and identity. Language Learning, 56(4), 609-632.
Schumann, J. H. (1997). The neurobiology of affect in language. Oxford: Blackwell.
Sealey, A., & Carter, B. (2004). Applied linguistics as social science. London, Continuum.
Showers, C. (1992). Compartmentalization of positive and negative self-knowledge: Keeping bad apples out of the bunch. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62(6), 1036-1049.
Smith, L. B. (2005). Cognition as a dynamic system: Principles from embodiment. Developmental Review, 25, 278-298.
Swan, M. (2004). Complex quantum chaos and the present perfect. ELT Journal, 58(1), 68-70.
Swann, W. B. (1997). The trouble with change: Self-verification and allegiance to the self. Psychological Science, 8(3), 117-180.
Thelen, E., & Smith, L. B. (1994). A dynamic systems approach to the development of cognition and action. Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press.
Urry, J. (2005). The complexity turn. Theory, Culture and Society, 22(5), 1-14.
Ushioda, E. (2007). Motivation and language. In J.-O. Östmann, & J. Verschueren (Eds.), Handbook of Pragmatics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Ushioda, E. (2009). A person-in-context relational view of emergent motivation, self and identity. In Z. Dörnyei, & E. Ushioda (Eds.), Motivation, language identity and the L2 self (pp. 215-228). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Ushioda, E. (2011). Motivating learners to speak as themselves. In G. Murray, X. Gao, & T. Lamb (Eds.), Identity, motivation and autonomy in language learning (pp. 11-24). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Vallacher, R. R., & Nowak, A. (1997). The emergence of dynamical social psychology. Psychological Inquiry, 8(2), 73-99.
Vallacher, R. R., Nowak, A., & Froehlich, M. (2002). The dynamics of self-evaluation. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 6(4), 370-379.
Williams, M., & Burden, R. L. (1997). Psychology for language teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Netlogo. Retrieved from http://ccl.northwestern.edu/netlogo/.
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.