Foreign Language Annals
vol. 42, No.

3 483

One Right Way, Intercultural

Participation, and Language
Learning Anxiety: A Qualitative
Analysis of Adult Online
Heritage and Nonheritage
Language Learners
Joellen E. Coryell
The University of Texas at San Antonio

M. Carolyn Clark
Texas A&M University

Abstract: This study investigated self-assessed anxious learners who enrolled in

online Spanish courses to determine if their anxiety was mediated by the lack of face-
to-face (F2F) and other synchronous learning interactions. Participants were enrolled
in courses at two postsecondary institutions located in south-central Texas. Narrative
analysis was used to interpret the interview data. Findings indicated participants ex-
perienced language anxiety because their previous F2F and online learning experiences
enforced the concept of language as performance with a focus on correctness and preci-
sion. However, intercultural respect and a desire to participate meaningfully with
diverse cultural communities became a resource for our participants as they wrestled
with language learning anxiety and persisted in their learning endeavors. Implications
for designing online language instruction for anxious, self-directed adults are offered.

Key words: adult language learning, heritage and nonheritage language learners,
intercultural participation, language learning anxiety, online language learning

Language: relevant to all languages

In today’s information and communication age, adults choose to learn or improve

their knowledge of languages for a variety of reasons and in a variety of settings. As

Joellen E. Coryell (PhD, Texas A&M University) is Assistant Professor of Adult

Learning and Teaching at The University of Texas at San Antonio.

M. Carolyn Clark (EdD, University of Georgia) is Associate Professor of Adult

Education at Texas A&M University in College Station.
484
such, language learning settings are steeped
in a multifarious set of influences upon the
learners’ study and understanding. At the
core of acquiring a new language, students
learn how to communicate their own per-
sonally meaningful and conversationally
appropriate messages through new struc-
tures and systems of the target language
(Horwitz, 1999); indeed, ‘‘to study how
we learn a new language is to study how
the body, mind, and emotions fuse to create
self-expression’’ (Young, 1999, p. 13).
Foreign or second language (L2) learn-
ing is often studied within the framework of
sociocultural and constructivist learning per-
spectives (Block, 2003; Lantolf & Pavlenko,
2001). That is, cognition is a process that in-
cludes social and cultural activity within the
particular educational situation and the lear-
ner’s individual, interpersonal context
(Vygotsky, 1978; Wright, 2000). Learners
develop (or fail to develop) and participate
(or choose nonparticipation) via interaction
with other communication agents. Unfortu-
nately, foreign and L2 learning can leave
some individuals feeling anxious, self-con-
scious, and frustrated (Gregersen & Horwitz,
2002; Horwitz, Horwitz, & Cope, 1986).
This tendency to experience an anxious re-
sponse during language learning interactions
is described as ‘‘language learning anxiety’’
(LLA). Though not correlated to perfor-
mance anxiety on the whole (Gardner &
MacIntyre, 1993; Horwitz et al., 1986),
learners may experience LLA due to previous
negative experiences with language learning
or with individuals from another culture, or
for various other sociocultural reasons
(Hodne, 1997; Price, 1991; Young, 1991).
In the classroom setting, verbal inter-
action, face-to-face (F2F) with peers and
instructor, is the most anxiety-producing
task for students (Young, 1991). As a result,
anxious learners are not likely to participate
actively in language class. More recently,
however, language education across the
globe makes use of distance technologies,
which does not always include F2F or
synchronous interaction. Although a grow-
ing body of empirical studies of language
Fall 2009
e-learning is forming, no research to date
has specifically studied LLA in online for-
eign or L2 learning settings. The purpose of
this study, therefore, was to investigate
whether LLA is indeed mediated by the on-
line learning venue. By examining how and
why some learners experience anxiety
while studying a language online, we hoped
to gain fresh insight into the LLA phenom-
enon that has previously been anchored in
traditional classroom interactions.
Literature Review and
Theoretical Framework
Language is personal and communally situ-
ated. As such, we employ a two-lens frame-
work to this research. Lantolf and Pavlenko
(2001) have offered a sociocultural activity
theory of L2 learning in which language
learners play active roles in their learning
and construct the conditions and provisions
of their own education. In addition, the re-
search is viewed through the lens of situated
cognition, which also considers the context
and influences inherent in the educational
environment. Central to the theory are
communities of practice, which Lave and
Wenger referred to as ‘‘a set of relations
among person, activity, and world, over
time and in relation with other tangential
and overlapping communities of practice’’
(1991, p. 98). Within this framework,
learning is viewed as a function of the con-
text, actions, behaviors, and culture in
which it occurs. This approach does not
consider the learner in an isolated, decon-
textualized language learning vacuum, but
instead takes into account the historical,
social, and cultural contexts that learners
bring with them to the learning setting.
Bakhtin (1986) stressed that the gener-
ation of speech is a process that requires
individuals to appropriate the words, ex-
pressions, and intonations of others.
Continuous and constant social interac-
tions allow an individual to assimilate
language structures and meanings as one’s
own, and for one’s own purposes. The ex-
change of utterances and other expressive
Foreign Language Annals
vol. 42, No. 3
language components is put into the indi-
vidual’s personal context of understanding
and is dependent upon the nature of the
continual response and anticipation of
speech. Block (2003) suggested that when
individuals learn a language, they appropri-
ate communicative components from some-
one else (the target language) and create it as
their own. He described this experience as
being ‘‘not just the passing of the external to
the internal; it is the meeting of the external
and the internal to form a synthesized new
state’’ (Block, 2003, p. 103). Thus, the idea of
participating in the target language commu-
nity could require transforming oneself
through language. This may be an unfamiliar
exercise for some learners, one that may be
cause for uncertainty and anxiety.
Language Learning Anxiety as a
Construct
Horwitz et al. (1986) explained the nature
of LLA in the following way: Adults typi-
cally perceive themselves as reasonably
intelligent, socially adept individuals, sen-
sitive to different sociocultural mores.
These assumptions are rarely challenged
when communicating in a native language
as it is not usually difficult to understand
others or to make oneself understood.
However, the situation when learning a for-
eign language stands in marked contrast. As
an individual’s communication attempts
will be evaluated according to uncertain or
even unknown linguistic and sociocultural
standards, L2 communication entails risk-
taking and is necessarily problematic. Be-
cause complex and nonspontaneous mental
operations are required in order to com-
municate at all, any performance in the L2
is likely to challenge an individual’s self-
concept as a competent communicator and
lead to reticence, self-consciousness, fear,
or even panic (Horwitz et al., 1986, p. 128).
LLA is a combination of communica-
tion apprehension, test anxiety, and anxiety
of being negatively evaluated by others. The
amalgamation of these affective factors is
something unique to the foreign language
485
learning setting. Those who experience
high levels of anxiety in other academic
subjects may or may not experience it in
language class, while those who do not ex-
perience anxiety in other situations may
suffer from it when learning a new language
(MacIntyre & Gardner, 1991).
Research has shown that LLA includes
feelings such as trauma, dread, embarrass-
ment, wanting to hide, disability or inability
to learn foreign language, losing a personal
positive self-concept, and physiological ex-
periences such as rapid heartbeat, sweaty
palms, and shaking hands (Cohen & Norst,
1989; Horwitz et al., 1986; Price, 1991;
Young, 1991). In addition, studies indicate
that anxiety mainly causes problems with
listening and speaking activities in F2F in-
struction or in testing situations (Horwitz,
Horwitz, & Cope, 1991; Madsen, Brown, &
Jones, 1991; Price, 1991). Anxious students
have reported experiencing the phenome-
non of having the word, phrase, and/or
grammatical structure elude them, a tem-
porary loss of ability to retrieve knowledge
they possessed when faced with an on-the-
spot need to produce in the target language
(Horwitz et al., 1986).
Other studies have revealed that anxious
students feel left behind by a too-hurried
pace in classroom lessons; are concerned
about embarrassing themselves, being ridi-
culed, or not being understood; and have
often had previous negative experiences in
language classes (Horwitz et al., 1986, 1991;
MacIntyre & Gardner, 1991; Price, 1991). In
some cases, anxious language students re-
ported avoiding studying and even missing
the foreign language class to alleviate their
apprehension (Horwitz et al., 1991).
Ganschow and Sparks (1991, 1996)
suggested that a disability in language pro-
cessing in the native language, and not LLA
as defined above, causes difficulties in lan-
guage learning settings and consequently
produces student anxiety about learning
foreign languages. Whether LLA stems from
native language processing disabilities,
from pedagogical classroom approaches,
from personality and other individual and
486
cultural influences (Gregersen & Horwitz,
2002; Jackson, 2002; Lalonde & Gardner,
1984; MacIntyre & Charos, 1995; Skehan,
1991), from previous negative experiences
with language classes or learners (Chen &
Chang, 2004), or from a combination there-
in, the student’s affective domain must be
considered in language learning facilitation.
Feelings of inadequacy, lack of language
learning aptitude, and fear of embarrassment
can be painful experiences.
Affect in Adult Online Learning
Online delivery is rapidly becoming the
preferred instructional technology of post-
secondary institutions (Reynard, 2003). In
the rush to provide online instruction
across the educational spectrum, students’
affective experiences in online courses were
not initially considered in research (Hara &
Kling, 1999). Recent studies, however, have
linked online adult student affect to inade-
quate computer knowledge, dissatisfaction
with the course and course components,
and concern about Internet access and
technical problems (Cheney, 2000; Conrad,
2002; Cuneo & Harnish, 2002; Hara &
Kling, 1999; Kelsey, Lindner, and Dooley,
2002; Saunders et al., 1998).
Social interaction in online courses was
found to be anxiety-causing in cases where
students were uncomfortable with text-
based communications and inconsistent
computer and Internet access (Saunders et
al., 1998). Cuneo and Harnish’s (2002)
study found that students who experienced
anxiety online were more likely to engage
in electronic discussion only at a surface
level, signifying they were interested in rote
learning and memorization without reach-
ing much understanding of underlying
meanings of concepts and complex subject
matter. The anxious students were more apt
to be apprehensive about appearing igno-
rant of skills or subject matter with their
online postings. Non-anxious students who
studied learning content for meaning and
personal connections had much less fear
about online discussions. However, surface
Fall 2009
learners will be at-risk in online conferenc-
ing environments that expect engagement
in higher-ordered thinking, problem-based,
and inquiry-based learning activities.
Sociocultural Contexts and Online
Language Learning
As Spanish is a widely spoken language in
the United States, Spanish students may
have a wide range of experiences and profi-
ciency in the language. Along with students
who have no cultural connection with the
target language, heritage language learners
(HLLs) include those who may have been
reared in a Spanish-speaking home or com-
munity, have been educated in Spanish-
speaking countries, and/or may have studied
Spanish at some level in school (González-
Pino, 2000; Valdés, 2005). In fact, these
learners make up a substantial percentage of
the enrollment in higher education Spanish
courses today (LeBlanc & Lally, 1997).
As is the case in F2F courses, both her-
itage and nonheritage learners enroll in
online Spanish classes. As adults, many
HLLs in the United States have varying lev-
els of Spanish proficiency, yet they are fluent
users of English. Campbell and Christian’s
(2003) work indicated that second- and
third-generation Hispanics acquire varying
levels of bilingualism based on familial and
intergenerational target language contact
experiences. In addition, adult HLLs have
often learned a local Spanish variety and are
interested in acquiring the oral and written
language skills associated with formal, aca-
demic registers (Polinksy & Kagan, 2007).
However, attitudes about varieties of Span-
ish spoken in home communities in the
United States can affect the learning and
maintenance of Spanish for these learners
(González-Pino, 2000; Roca, 1997; Valdés,
2005). Though space does not allow a full
description here, several studies have in-
vestigated the factors that affect Spanish
heritage language learning within F2F in-
structional settings. Additional research on
HLLs and language pedagogy include heri-
tage and bilingual language learning and
Foreign Language Annals
vol. 42, No. 3
teaching, heritage language maintenance,
the differences and similarities between ac-
ademic Spanish and the varieties of Spanish
commonly used by heritage speakers, and
language ideologies and attitudes influenc-
ing Spanish language classrooms (e.g.,
Bailey, 2002; Carreira, 2004; del Valle, 2006;
Durán-Cerda, 2008; Leeman, 2005; Leeman
& Martı́nez, 2007; Potowski, 2002; Roca &
Colombi, 2003; Suárez, 2002; Toribio, 2002;
Train, 2007; Urciuoli, 1996; Valdés, 2005;
Valdés, Fishman, Chávez, & Pérez, 2006;
Zentella, 1997).
Accordingly, we believe that all adults,
including heritage and nonheritage learn-
ers, engage in online language learning and
practice with a complex milieu of experi-
ences, motivations, and expectations that
affect the way in which they approach and
understand their own learning processes.
Within a socially constructed framework of
language learning, adding the dimension of
online instruction provides new challenges
and opportunities for language teachers and
learners. One challenge is that Web-based
instruction is often customized for a particu-
lar, homogeneous cultural group of learners
(McLoughlin, 1999). In fact, some research-
ers argue that technology is instilled with
Euro-American values, advances determin-
ism, and undercuts the values and needs of
culturally diverse learners (Damarin, 1998;
McLoughlin, 1999; Walls, 1994). Indeed,
there can be a tension between the need to
provide a culturally flexible and sensitive
learning environment while developing in-
struction and infrastructure for the cognitive
styles and preferences of individual students
(Damarin, 1998).
The cultural system of a classroom
affects participation, interaction styles, and
power negotiations. Although technical ac-
cess and support in online learning envi-
ronments may be intended to provide
channels of communication for learners,
design components may cause cultural
misunderstandings and marginalization
(McLoughlin, 1999). On the other hand,
researchers suggest that removing the F2F
structure of traditional classes and replac-
487
ing it with a setting that allows for
asynchronous learning may relieve anxiety
for some language learners (Beauvois, 1998;
Kelm, 1992; Roed, 2003). The ‘‘anytime,
anywhere’’ concept of online learning may
also allow for a less-hurried approach to
instruction and learner processing, fewer
requirements of on-the-spot production in
the target language, and fewer opportuni-
ties to feel embarrassed with physically
present classmates.
The Study
We know that adult learners have amassed a
collection of experiences that are drawn
upon as valuable learning resources (Cran-
ton, 2000; Knowles, 1984). By maturity,
adult students are able to identify their
learning strengths and weaknesses and de-
velop toward a self-directed approach in
their learning (Knowles, 1984; Stolovitch &
Keeps, 2002). Accordingly, our research
questions focused on examining how and
why some adult learners experience anxiety
while studying Spanish online. Our ap-
proach to answering these questions in-
volved investigating stories our participants
told about language learning processes,
motivations, understandings, and choices.
Participants
A call for participation was sent to online
Spanish course enrollees at two postsec-
ondary institutions located in south-central
Texas. Specifically, the invitation to partici-
pate asked, ‘‘Have you ever experienced
frustration, anxiety, concern, worry, or ap-
prehension in the process of learning a
language? What about when you are study-
ing a language online? If you are interested
in discussing some of the emotional aspects
of learning a language and learning in on-
line courses, please contact the researchers
directly.’’
Participation required volunteers to
have been enrolled within the past six
months in a fully online, second course or
higher in Spanish. Participants had taken at
least one previous online course, signifying
488 Fall 2009

a familiarity with the structural and tech-
nological aspects of online learning. The L2
women who participated in the study iden-
tified themselves as fluent English speakers
with varying levels of anxiety in their lan-
guage learning processes. Their specific
participation was not revealed to the in-
structors or institutions.
Eleven of the participants lived in
south-central Texas; one participant resided
in a large, northeastern U.S. city. The fol-
lowing profiles illustrate their ages, self-
reported cultural identifiers and Spanish
proficiency, and identified motivations to
learn Spanish. Pseudonyms are used in this
report.
Participant Profiles
All the informants were enrolled full-time in
coursework, and all but one also worked (see
Table 1). They consistently described online
courses as ‘‘convenient’’ and ‘‘flexible.’’ Seven
participants self-identified as second- or
third-generation Mexican Americans. Based
on the definition of Spanish as a heritage
language provided above, we refer to this
group of participants as HLLs.
Learning Context
In borderland communities such as those in
the current study, foreign language courses
are not always foreign, even for nonheritage
learners. Spanish is a language spoken fre-
quently in the communities in which the
participants lived; as such, they also had ac-
cess to Spanish radio and television stations,
newspapers and magazines, billboards, and
businesses, and multiple opportunities to
hear (and often engage) in Spanish conver-
sations. Accordingly, we recognized that

TABLE 1
Participant Profiles

Self-assessed
Age, Spanish
Pseudonym ethnicity proficiency Identified motivations

Sue Late 20s, Beginning Sue wanted to learn Spanish

white because it is widely spoken in
her home and work community.
Trisha Late 30s, Beginning Trisha chose to learn Spanish to
African be able to communicate with
American her Spanish-speaking
coworkers in their heritage
language.
Lola Mid-30s, Beginning Lola wanted to be able to speak
white Spanish so she could more fully
participate in her diverse home
and work communities.
Kelly Mid-30s, Beginning Kelly wanted to learn Spanish to
African ‘‘communicate freely’’ in the
American diverse language community
where she lives.
Barbara Mid-30s, Intermediate Barbara has many good friends
African and coworkers who are
American Hispanic and speak Spanish
Foreign Language Annals
vol. 42, No. 3 489

TABLE 1. (Continued).

Self-assessed
Age, Spanish
Pseudonym ethnicity proficiency Identified motivations

and with each other. She wanted to

Caucasian participate more fully with them
in their heritage language.
Nelle Early 50s, Intermediate Nelle wanted to improve her
Hispanic Spanish to communicate with
her Mexican husband and
cultural community and to
teach the language to her child.
Carolyn Mid-30s, Intermediate Carolyn chose to learn Spanish
Hispanic because she wanted to connect
more fully with the heritage
community and to use Spanish
at work and with her Mexican
boyfriend and his parents.
Jill Mid-40s, Intermediate Jill wanted to relearn Spanish,
Hispanic her first language before
entering English-only
schooling, and to teach the
language to her young children.
Linda Mid-30s, Advanced Linda used Spanish at home and
Hispanic at work and wanted to improve
her proficiency to communicate
with monolingual Spanish
speakers.
Marina Mid-30s, Advanced Marina uses Spanish at home
Latina and in her work and wanted to
improve her proficiency to
distinguish between ‘‘proper
Spanish’’ and the local Spanish
dialect.
Rebekka Early 20s, Advanced Rebekka studied Spanish to
Hispanic improve her spoken and written
proficiencies for use at work
and with Mexican nationals in
her community.
Martha Mid-40s, Fluent Martha studied Spanish to learn
Hispanic more about her bicultural
heritage and perfect her spoken
and written abilities in ‘‘proper
Spanish.’’
490
learning can take place in and out of class
(virtual or F2F), during teacher-directed
activities, individual study, and informal
learning communications with other learn-
ers and experts.
The instructors of the courses were all
of Latino/a ethnicity. The online courses
provided students with Spanish texts, course
materials on CD-ROM, and audio files for
listening tasks, and some of the courses re-
quired the learners to upload personal
Spanish oral response recordings for assess-
ment on correct vocabulary, pronunciation,
and usage. Students were not required, how-
ever, to communicate or engage in dialogue
synchronously or asynchronously in Spanish
with other online students or the instructors.
In fact, the participants defined their courses
as ‘‘the epitome of an online classFyou
never had any contact with anyone.’’ They
described instructor feedback on their work
as direct and minimal, generally as either
‘‘right’’ or ‘‘wrong,’’ ‘‘full credit’’ or ‘‘no credit.’’
Data Gathering
Interviews were semi-structured, and par-
ticipants had the choice to meet in-person
with the interviewer or via telephone. The
five F2F interviews occurred at the partici-
pant’s home, office, or a quiet space at a
local community center. The remaining in-
terviews took place via phone conference.
The interviews began with an opportunity
to discuss work roles, language learning
experiences, and demographic information.
Our discussions focused on the partici-
pants’ attitudes, motivations, and general
affective experiences with their language
learning processes. We attended to the
types of emotional responses they experi-
enced and requested detailed stories about
times when they had anxious reactions in
language learning situations. These stories
illustrated experiences in the online class,
in previous language courses in F2F set-
tings, and in social and cultural language
encounters across the lifespan.
By providing a space for these learners
to expound upon their experiences, we
Fall 2009
hoped to glean a deeper understanding of
LLA, online and off, than has previously
been rendered. Each interview was re-
corded and lasted one to two hours.
The interviewer communicated with each
of the participants during the transcrip-
tion process as well, and throughout the
analysis for clarifications and supplemen-
tary explanations. In total, the data set
consisted of extensive interview transcrip-
tions and notes taken from multiple follow-
up phone and e-mail discussions with each
participant.
Analysis
During the interview, both the interviewer
and participant attempted to examine why
the learner felt she had responded to differ-
ent language learning tasks and interactions
in the way she had. These initial conversa-
tions often signaled sensitizing concepts,
‘‘important features of social interaction’’
(Bowen, 2006, p. 3) that were investigated
in further iterations of the analysis. In these
reflexive discussions, we attended to the
beliefs and motivations that formed their
perceptions. This dialogue helped shape the
comprehensive analysis done across the
data.
We used the constant-comparative
method (Bogdan & Biklen, 2003; Glaser &
Strauss, 1967) to get a connective sense of
the data set by identifying codes and
grouping them into categories and subcate-
gories. In this method, we listed specific
words and phrases our participants used
when discussing anxious and uncomfort-
able experiences in formal and informal
learning settings. The participants experi-
enced various levels of anxiety in their
learning, which is evidenced by the words
they used to describe their anxious experi-
ences; they ranged from feeling ‘‘intense
anxiety,’’ ‘‘frustration,’’ ‘‘obsession,’’ and
‘‘stress,’’ to ‘‘nervous’’ and ‘‘silly.’’ We then
noted the contexts in which they described
theses experiences, whether F2F or their
online courses. By comparing the codes and
contexts across the data, the major catego-
Foreign Language Annals
vol. 42, No. 3
ries of the comparative analysis became (1)
the types of anxiety-triggering tasks and
communicative actions in which partici-
pants engaged online and outside of class in
their study of Spanish, (2) how they expe-
rienced LLA, and (3) why they believed
they felt this anxiety. Sociocultural influ-
ences emerged as the connective tissue
throughout the data set.
In interviews and subsequent follow-up
discussions, we asked the participants to
tell us stories to help us better understand
their anxious language learning experi-
ences. Consequently, we turned to narrative
analysis to investigate how the informants
structured their accounts to make sense of
their experiences (Riessman, 2008). We
employed a holistic-form mode method,
which focuses on the structure of a story,
to examine the participants’ narrative
interpretations individually and then col-
lectively (Lieblich, Tuval-Mashiach, &
Zilber, 1998). We read each of the stories
multiple times to understand the context in
which they occurred and to explore their
underlying themes. We then looked at each
specific theme across the data set and doc-
umented how many details were offered in
explanation, how often the theme was re-
peated, and how much length/space it
occupied throughout the transcribed texts.
Next, we recorded our global impressions
of the collection, noted exceptions to these
impressions, and identified contradictions
and unfinished descriptions. We then read
each story again, separately, by theme, with
careful attention to the mood, tension, and
evaluation of the teller.
In narratives, the action is the way the
meaning moves forward. Ultimately, we
identified this story movement (swings in
mood and tension) throughout the data to
identify how the participants created
meaning from these events and how they
shaped their understanding about language
and culture in the process. Focusing on the
‘‘action’’ of the informants’ narratives, we
graphically charted the trajectories of their
anxiety in Spanish learning accounts to
construct the whole story of how personal
491
dramas were resolved. We provide the re-
sults of comparative examination of the
content and the holistic-form analysis of
the way in which informants described and
resolved the narratives here.
Findings
We begin this section with additional infor-
mation regarding the collective socio-
linguistic profile of these anxious learners.
All the participants self-identified as expe-
riencing anxiety in their language learning
processes. They lived in multiple worlds
and occupied multiple positionalities.
Kasworm beautifully described the context
these adult college students lived in as
‘‘worlds of action and commitment, worlds
of emotional validation and conflict, and
worlds that will change both the mind and
the heart’’ (2008, p. 27). Unlike younger
students, these adults did not go away to
college and separate themselves from family
and community. Rather, they embarked on
academic journeys by selecting challenging
life goals to support and enhance their
worlds of commitments and possibilities.
The participants described their reentry
into college as adding the challenging role
of ‘‘student’’ to their busy lives of work,
caregiving, and family responsibilities. On-
line education promised flexibility to learn
when and where their demanding lives
permitted.
The content of the narratives provided
below shows that these adults approached
their Spanish courses as more than just ac-
quiring an ability to communicate in a
foreign language. They had passionate
motivations to learn Spanish because
that ability buttressed their concepts of in-
tercultural competence, sensitivity, and
respect. Their motive to learn Spanish was
to improve their capacity to participate and
connect meaningfully with the Spanish-
speaking cultural community. As such, they
had high expectations for their learning and
their abilities because they viewed them-
selves as a part of a greater, interculturally
sensitive community. We found that though
492
they chose to study online, these participa-
tion motivations influenced their personal
approaches to language learning online and
within their work and home communities.
Each told stories of interactions within the
course as well with Spanish-speaking com-
munity members.
Both the nonheritage and heritage
learners chose to learn Spanish in order to
participate more fully with the Spanish-
speaking cultural community. Their goals
were to build relationships by communi-
cating effectively with actual people in their
lives. Correspondingly, these relationships
fueled their motivations to learn Spanish.
The nonheritage learners wanted to connect
genuinely and respectfully with their
friends and peers ‘‘in their language.’’ For
example, Trisha explained that, as a career
counselor, her respect for diversity meant
learning to speak the language associated
with her clients’ ethnicity and culture and
working with them ‘‘in their community, in
their homes, in their language.’’ Similarly,
Barbara was interested in learning Spanish
because she believed that language profi-
ciency demonstrates respect for diverse
cultures. She explained, ‘‘A lot of that comes
from work, because our company is very
diverse and that diversity is seen as a big
thing. And, it’s respecting everyone’s views
and their background, and I take that very
seriously.’’
Likewise, Lola wanted to speak Spanish
because her workplace and neighborhood
were also very diverse. She added, ‘‘It’s cool
to be bilingual!’’ The current national polit-
ical backdrop regarding immigration and
languages other than English also influ-
enced her motivation to learn Spanish:
I find it interesting to learn about the
Hispanic culture. There’s this big thing
going on right now about the illegal
immigrants and of course [former
President George W.] Bush talked
about this last night. So, it makes it
come to the forefront of your mind.
Why should we be judgmental about
the language they speak? We should be
Fall 2009
trying to speak their language because
they’re trying to speak ours! So, I don’t
understand the whole issue with it, ac-
tually, it makes me want to learn even
more actually. . .. I think it would make
me a better person in the fact that I can
communicate with someone who may
not be able to communicate in English!
It would just make me feel better
about it.
Political influences, including the move
to one national language and the contro-
versy over Mexican immigration policy,
shaped her approach to learning and using
Spanish.
Similar to the nonheritage language
students, cultural connections to the lan-
guage also influenced the HLLs. They
believed that because they are Hispanic,
they should be able to speak Spanish.
Carolyn’s comments exemplified the senti-
ments across the HLL narratives: ‘‘I’m
Hispanic, [yet] I don’t know how to speak
Spanish, and I’m losing out on my culture.
I should know it.’’
As very young children, many of the
HLLs grew up hearing and speaking
Spanish and English with family and
friends. However, once they began school,
instruction and learning participation
were solely in English. None was afforded
bilingual education opportunities. Jill’s first
language was Spanish, and her parents only
spoke Spanish throughout her childhood.
She lamented that she ‘‘lost it all once [she]
started school . . . it’s a shame.’’
Nelle’s sentiments illustrated the col-
lective motivations the HLLs had in
studying Spanish with this explanation:
I grew up in a Hispanic family. We’re, my
whole family, is from the U.S., but we
have a Spanish background. [But] I don’t
have the official language, the proper
[Spanish], you know, how to properly
say the right words in Spanish.
The HLLs in this study were fluent En-
glish speakers but were disappointed that
they had not developed fluency in Spanish.
Foreign Language Annals
vol. 42, No. 3
For them, an ability to communicate well in
Spanish promised meaningful participation
in their heritage community.
To summarize, we found that the stu-
dents’ motivations to learn Spanish were
specifically to participate in the Spanish-
speaking community. They were eager to be
included in this community and to contrib-
ute in ways that demonstrated sociocultural
respect and intercultural competence. So
why, we asked, did they experience various
degrees of anxiety in their language learn-
ing processes? In response, they offered
multiple stories from across their personal
language learning histories as well as from
the online course. In analyzing these sto-
ries, a salient theme emerged. The anxious
adults in this study found that the focus of
language competence in formal and infor-
mal instruction was firmly placed on
correctness and precision. Language pro-
duction was conceived as a performance,
rather than as a communicative medium for
community interaction. These experiences
repositioned their attention away from par-
ticipation and meaningful communication
to memorization and errorless production.
Consequently, this shift in focus reshaped
the nature of their affective approaches to
language learning. Though the motivation
to participate respectfully and competently
remained, their concentrated awareness of
each utterance transformed the eagerness to
anxiety. Below, we highlight the mismatch
between traditional instructional practices
and what is actually called for in developing
language and intercultural communication,
and, therefore, becoming a part of a com-
munity.
Only ‘‘One Right Way’’ and Language
Learning Anxiety
The online course instruction and context
reinforced the value placed on precision,
speed, and quick response (Reeder, Mac-
Fadyen, Roche, & Chase, 2004). Assign-
ments and discrete-point tests that the
instructors could grade quickly and com-
puter programs scored instantaneously
493
focused learning outcomes specifically
upon the accuracy of the students’ memori-
zation skills and ability to recall structural
aspects of the language. Nelle’s description
of a time she had to be precise in her online,
short-answer exam exemplifies this finding:
So, I get my result, you get your result
right away, and it was like a 78. And I
was like ‘‘what?’’ It [the computerized
scoring software] marked everything
where I’d added more than I needed to,
[even though] my answer was right.
But, I added more information so it
marked it wrong.
Accordingly, their online courses be-
came sources of information, and their
assignments and tests became exercises in
memorization and performance rather than
on communication and participation. On-
line language instructional practices and
assessments that limited them to single cor-
rect responses and timed completions often
discouraged the students from expanding
their thoughts and approximating authentic
language communication. The focus was
clearly on correctness and precision.
Their online course experiences, how-
ever, only reinforced what they understood
the goal of language production to be from
previous formal and informal learning in-
teractions: There is one ‘‘right way’’ to
perform meaning in Spanish, and their job
was to learn that one way. Within this per-
ceived, and perpetuated, narrow view of
language competence, our participants
frantically searched for the right pronunci-
ation, word, phrase, and verb tense with
every utterance and written product. Along
with the pursuit of ‘‘right,’’ deeper probing
tapped into the sociocultural sensitivities
our informants possessed and the associa-
tions they made between language compe-
tence and appropriate communicative and
intercultural respect. Indeed, they believed
a precise command of the language must be
acquired before one should attempt any real
communicative participation in the desired
community. Notably, based on their experi-
ences and motivations, the heritage and
494
nonheritage groups defined this ‘‘one way’’
somewhat differently.
Participation in a Cultural
Community Other than One’s Own
In the online course, ‘‘right’’ for the non-
heritage learners often centered on know-
ing specific vocabulary, verb tenses and
conjugation, and pronunciation. These stu-
dents expressed anxiety when preparing
online assignments and taking exams. To
illustrate the focus on correctness, Barbara
explained, ‘‘I spend most of my time making
sure I understand the question, and I’m an-
swering it right, so I stress out like, ooh, am
I saying this word right? I have to make sure
it’s right when I’m doing it.’’
Likewise, Trisha felt she did not possess
enough knowledge about verb conjugation
to attempt many course assignments with
confidence. She admitted, ‘‘The anxiety
started building up, and I started freaking
out . . .. With Spanish, I do need feedback
like you know, every minuteFuntil I’m ac-
curate.’’ She decided she needed one-
on-one instruction to determine exactly
where her problems were with homework
and speaking exercises before she risked
independent, authentic attempts at com-
munication. This focus on correctness
discouraged her from taking risks in
approximating the language as she con-
structed meaning in online tasks and
informal F2F Spanish practice with her co-
workers. Her need to know the ‘‘right way’’
before she attempted the practice tasks
stalled her learning processes.
In addition, though participants be-
lieved there was value in learning an
academic version of Spanish they were
studying online, their experiences with
friends and coworkers also called for
knowledge of a more social, casual version
of the language. To clarify, not only did
these participants believe there to be a pre-
cise language standard in academic settings,
but their offline learning experiences rein-
forced the importance of developing ways
to communicate in a precisely informal way.
Fall 2009
Barbara believed she was a good language
learner, but she confided, ‘‘Especially when
[I’m] speaking to a native Spanish speaker,
I get very stressed out.’’ She suggested,
‘‘There’s book Spanish and street Spanish
and I’m trying not to do book Spanish and
look like, ‘OK you learned this in class,’ and
it’s not something you’re doing at a level of
loving Spanish.’’ When with a group of
Spanish-speaking friends, she used the per-
sonal pronoun yo to begin her sentence. Her
friends advised, ‘‘Oh, that’s book Spanish.
No one says yo before anything.’’ What was
‘‘right’’ in her online course set her apart
from her peers. She wanted to communicate
competently, in a manner that allowed her
to connect with her Spanish-speaking
friends in a comfortable, knowledgeable,
and culturally appropriate way.
Because the focus was on correctly
performing in Spanish, we found that the
nonheritage learners were concerned they
might offend their friends, neighbors, and
coworkers by committing errors in their
Spanish conversations. Barbara indicated, ‘‘I
don’t want them to think that I don’t respect
it [the Spanish language] by not saying it
right.’’ She found herself particularly anx-
ious about using correct pronunciation in a
conversation with a good friend. Although
he tried to help her, she worried her novice
attempts would be perceived as not re-
specting the culture enough to learn the
language sufficiently before engaging in
Spanish interactions:
He’s like, ‘‘No one’s going to die if
you’re saying it wrong!’’ And, I’m like,
‘‘I know they’re not, but I just feel bad.’’
. . . because it’s their heritage, I should
respect it by saying it right! I don’t want
them to think that I don’t respect it by
not saying it right.
In addition, Lola indicated anxiety and
self-consciousness when attempting to par-
ticipate in Spanish speaking outside of
class:
Sometimes I feel kind of stupid because
I almost feel like if I try to speak Span-
Foreign Language Annals
vol. 42, No. 3
ish to a Hispanic, they think I might be
trying to talk down to them because
[they might think] ‘‘I know English,
stupid!’’ So, you never know! It’s one of
those things where you almost feel like
it’s become a political issue. Because
you do listen to people sometimes and
you’re sitting there trying to speak
Spanish, struggling through it and they
might very well be appreciative that
you’re trying it, but sometimes there’s
those few people who are like, ‘‘You
know, I speak English perfectly well!’’
Lola’s desire to learn from friends and
coworkers conflicted with her fear of
offending the Spanish-English bilingual in-
terlocutor. The results were dichotomous
sociocultural and political influences on
how she approached language practice and
how she perceived her role in intercultural
communications. She experienced LLA in
her learning and production because of in-
terwoven understandings of cultural and
linguistic sensitivity.
The nonheritage learners equated the
Spanish language with the Hispanic culture;
therefore, a mistake in the former was an
insult to the latter. Current political and
sociological structures contextualized their
concepts of respect for diversity with regard
to language. Accordingly, these beliefs im-
pacted their language learning processes as
they engaged in Spanish learning online, at
work, and with friends.
Participation With One’s Own
Heritage Community
Like the nonheritage language learners, the
HLLs were also intimidated by speaking
with Spanish experts, but they defined the
‘‘right way’’ to speak differently. Rebekka
admitted, ‘‘When I speak to people who I
know speak very proper Spanish, I get ton-
gue-tied.’’ These students understood the
‘‘right way’’ as a formal register in Spanish to
which they were not privy as youngsters.
They believed that online Spanish educa-
tion would provide clarification and insight
into what they termed ‘‘real Spanish.’’
495
Online, the HLLs were not only interested
in completing the course requirements but
also in meeting the expectations of the in-
structors who shared their cultural heritage.
The instructor’s ‘‘beautiful’’ command of
Spanish influenced Carolyn’s motivation to
participate with the cultural community,
while it also impacted her anxiety level in
the course. She divulged that she spent 30
minutes recording and rerecording one
sentence in her oral assignment because
‘‘She’s [the instructor] going to listen to me
speaking Spanish, and I just want it to be
right. I try really hard to speak, like, proper
Spanish.’’
The HLLs also indicated their embar-
rassment when speaking to people from
Mexico and to other Spanish experts in
their home and work communities, in part,
because when they used their local version
of Spanish, they were not always under-
stood. Linda clarified this concern: ‘‘I think
[when] you speak to someone who knows
the language properly, it makes you feel if
you say something [incorrect] that anxiety
does, does occur.’’ She continued to explain
the difference between ‘‘proper Spanish’’
(the ‘‘right way’’) and the local variety:
The reason I took it [Spanish] is be-
cause, being from Texas, and especially
from South Texas, we have a tendency,
us Hispanics, to change the proper way
of saying some Spanish words . . . a lot
of words are used incorrectly, and I
wanted to get back to knowing exactly
how to use the proper Spanish words
that I was not using, that I knew I was
not using right. So I decided to take the
class to help me remember that’s the
correct word, and I’ve been saying it
incorrectly all this time.
Linda’s comments represented the sen-
timents from across the HLL narratives.
They had chosen to learn Spanish online in
order to perform in heritage communities
the ‘‘right way.’’ Carolyn suggested that
‘‘true Spanish’’ was ‘‘totally different’’ from
the dialect spoken in south-central Texas.
Her experiences practicing Spanish with
496
her Mexican boyfriend reinforced the im-
portance she placed on adhering to a
narrow view of what was right:
Being that Spanish was his first lan-
guage, he knows the proper way. Cer-
tain words, certain words that I don’t
realize are slang. And so, you know, for
instance, if you’re talking about a little
boy, like someone who’s little, it’s niño
pequeño, and pequeño being small and
so, chiquito is also small, and so I think I
was saying something, and I used the
word, chiquito, and he’s like, ‘‘that’s
slang for small.’’ I would have thought
that small is small. I mean, how many
ways can you say the word? So, he’s
like, ‘‘that’s not proper.’’
Carolyn was made aware of her defi-
ciencies in what a Spanish expert consid-
ered the only right way to communicate the
meaning of smallFwith the word pequeño,
and decidedly not with chiquito. This expe-
rience reinforced her anxious responses
about speaking in Spanish without possess-
ing all the tools necessary to do so properly.
Linda had a similar experience at
work when talking with a Spanish-speaking
client:
They were trying to tell me that the
bumper on the car had been damaged
on their vehicle, and I, I felt stupid
[laughs] because I didn’t know how to
say bumper! So I said, ahh . . . ‘‘bum-
per?’’ with an accent. And at that point,
it makes you feel, oh my goodness,
I really don’t know what I’m saying.
I need to go backwards. You know.
I need to learn what bumper is, what
windshield wiper is, and all these little
names that, the little words that you
don’t think are going to come up in an
everyday conversation, when the lan-
guage is needed. And at that moment it
was needed and I couldn’t, and I felt
silly, about bumper.
She shared this experience to illustrate
why it was so important to her to improve
her Spanish, and why she felt anxious
Fall 2009
about the endless situations in which
she feared she would not be able to com-
municate competently. In continuing her
story, she provided clarification about
her anxiety:
It threw me to mis-concentration and
everything that I was trying to commu-
nicate with this person [voice is very
soft here] . . . when you feel like you’ve
just been shoved down, it’s like, ooohh,
everything else just goes wrong. I re-
member, like kind of getting hot, from
[being] somewhat embarrassed, [be-
cause] there were a lot of Mexican
American people around me when I
was trying to communicate with this
person. I felt that much more sillier,
because it was like, ooh gosh, I volun-
teered to take the phone call, and I can’t
do this. So I’m looking red in the face
and my heart’s beating a little faster and
then more words coming out wrong
when I knew some of the words I was
saying [but said them incorrectly].
And, in the language itself, it flows, it
flows very smoothly when you’re
speaking Spanish. And when I carry on
a conversation, one break in something
that I say wrong, I would have to say
that it cause[s] anxiety because it
throws me off and then everything else
that I say is like, gosh, I can’t believe I
just said all that and it was all wrong!
In this exchange, Linda experienced
self-consciousness and cultural inadequacy.
She was proud of her heritage and felt she
should be able to speak properly because
she is Hispanic. Her confidence was
shattered because she made a mistake,
which she feared signified her cultural in-
competence.
Just as they experienced in the online
course, Marina and Martha believed so
strongly in the importance of knowing the
‘‘right way’’ that they felt mistakes in au-
thentic communication interactions should
also be corrected immediately. In fact, the
heritage participants believed it was prefer-
able not to speak the language at all than to
Foreign Language Annals
vol. 42, No. 3
speak it improperly. With a zero-tolerance
attitude toward incorrect Spanish usage
from instructors and other perceived ex-
perts, added pressure was placed on HLLs
as they struggled to acquire the ‘‘right
way’’ to participate in their own cultural
communities.
Language competence that is defined as
performance and acquisition of a single
‘‘right way’’ to communicate in the target
language restricts the anxious learner from
risk-taking and participation in the target
language community. Not surprisingly,
these learners were anxious in their online
courses when they were unable to find an-
swers to specific questions and when they
did not receive personal and timely feed-
back on their assignments, quizzes, and
exams. Ultimately, the participants felt
frustrated and isolated and believed they
were ‘‘on their own’’ in their e-language
learning. Certainly, the autonomy of the
online setting offered benefits of ‘‘anytime,
anywhere’’ learning flexibility and a certain
anonymity when producing/performing in
course tasks. However, the lack of an online
course community and the instructional
focus on language as performance rein-
forced unhelpful conceptions of correctness
and competence that did not address the
authentic communication and participation
motivations they had.
Intercultural Sensitivity and LLA:
Stories of Resolve and Perseverance
Though one might believe that LLA for
these participants hindered their learning
and would certainly impede successful out-
comes, further analysis provided insight
into how motivation and resolve moved the
action in these LLA stories in unexpected
ways. We understand the meaning of what
they tell us by looking at the construction of
their accountsFthe structure of the telling.
At this point, we focus on four vignettes we
have excerpted previously.
The first two LLA stories were from
nonheritage learners who described anxiety
stemming from the fear of offending Span-
497
ish-speaking interlocutors through incor-
rect usage. When Barbara tried to speak
Spanish with friends, she used the personal
pronoun yo. She experienced embarrass-
ment and anxiety when they suggested that
her word choice was too formal for that sit-
uation. Her anxiety increased in this com-
municative setting because she was worried
she might have offended her friends’ cul-
tural heritage. Likewise, Lola’s story about
striking up a Spanish conversation with a
coworker indicated her anxiety about
offending someone who may also speak
English. She feared that underlying socio-
political assumptions about her motives in
language choice could insult her Spanish
practice interlocutor.
The next two stories were about the
cultural embarrassment two HLLs experi-
enced by making a mistake when speaking
with a Spanish expert. Carolyn’s story about
speaking with her boyfriend increased her
anxiety about using words that native
Spanish speakers would consider slang.
Through that experience, she learned that
there are times when only one specific word
is appropriate; if she was not careful, she
herself would come across as inappropriate.
Similarly, Linda’s experience with not
knowing how to say bumper in Spanish led
her to feel embarrassed about her incom-
plete Spanish vocabulary and her inconsis-
tent ability to make herself understood in
the communal language of her heritage.
Their cultural connections to Spanish in-
creased the pressure to use the ‘‘right’’
version of Spanish at all times if they were
to participate in their heritage community.
In these stories, the speaker was de-
scribing discomfort about what she expe-
rienced. By looking at the brief moments in
time that participants recounted, we might
visually plot the dissection of LLA as they
experienced it as a downward sloping arrow
on a graph. Because the feelings that the
characters experienced were not positive,
the movement of the action plotline
goes down. At this point, one may believe
that a downward moving plotline would
likely lead to negative learning outcomes.
498
However, using a wide-angle perspective
provides the rest of the story.
Consistently, our participants were de-
termined to learn Spanish and participate in
the Spanish language community. Though
one student dropped the online course, all
were committed to further study of the lan-
guage. Some would choose to continue to
learn online. Others decided that to meet
their Spanish learning goals, they would
enroll in F2F classes. It is important to note
that every informant stated that her com-
municative participation with Spanish-
speaking people from her home and work
communities would continue.
Unfailingly, the participants were com-
mitted to acquiring a culturally sensitive,
communicative competence in Spanish.
Many believed it was beneficial for their
careers to speak Spanish well. The nonher-
itage participants desired to communicate
with Spanish speakers as a sign of cultural
solidarity in an American political era that
devalues languages other than English. The
HLLs felt they needed to get back what they
had lost, both linguistically and culturally,
to connect more fully with their heritage
community. Ultimately, we found that this
heterogeneous group of anxious learners
persisted in studying because they ardently
maintained that communicating appropri-
ately in Spanish was vital to developing
their intercultural sensitivity and gaining
inclusive access to an important commu-
nity. What is so clear here is that the partic-
ipants’ motivation and persistence were not
derailed by the anxiety they experienced in
their language learning processes. Indeed,
the wide-angled lens of holistic-form anal-
ysis allowed us to see the true direction
of our participants’ stories. We outlined
the stories’ plotlines to capture visually
the movement of the action. The charting of
the collective narrative was graphically
represented as an ascending wavy line. The
anxious communicative experiences along
the way temporarily repositioned the line
downward, while ultimately the plotline
progressed upward toward persistent deter-
mination. The participants experienced
Fall 2009
LLA in varied ways; however, in the end
they used these experiences to stimulate,
rather than impede, their learning.
Discussion and Implications
Clark and Dirkx (2008) argued that educa-
tors need to recognize the role that
emotions play in both the meaning adults
make of their lives and the ways in which
they construct that meaning. LLA as a con-
struct has been generally understood as a
negative emotion that leads learners to pro-
tect themselves from embarrassment in
formal language learning classrooms. Re-
search on LLA, therefore, has focused
attention on in-class activities and shown
that F2F interactions in the target language
are the most anxiety-laden tasks learners
encounter. Consequently, online language
study has been suggested in reducing anxi-
ety by removing the requirement of inter-
acting in person (Beauvois, 1998; Kelm,
1992; Roed, 2003). As such, the current
study investigated self-assessed anxious
learners who had enrolled in online Spanish
courses to determine if their anxiety was
indeed mediated by the lack of F2F and
other synchronous learning interactions. By
probing holistically into the entire story of
their anxiety in language learning, we found
that intercultural respect was the driving
force in their motivations to learn Spanish
because they wanted to participate sensi-
tively and meaningfully with the Spanish-
speaking community. We learned that LLA
occurred for these students in the online
setting, just as it did offline, because their
previous F2F and online learning experi-
ences enforced (and reinforced) the notion
of language as performance with a focus on
correctness and precision rather than on co-
construction of meaning and authentic par-
ticipation within a language community.
Consequently, these adult learners experi-
enced LLA because they connected the
success of their Spanish interactions with
perceptions of intercultural competence.
They were responsive to the cultural asso-
ciations inherent in communication and
Foreign Language Annals
vol. 42, No. 3
were unwilling to offend the cultural sensi-
tivities of Spanish natives and experts
by not communicating correctly or appro-
priately. Miscommunication (a bad perfor-
mance) became a signal of intercultural
incompetence.
Nevertheless, our analysis found that
their anxiety ultimately became a guide in
their learning endeavors. We argue that in-
tercultural respect as a motivation to learn a
language and ultimately participate mean-
ingfully with diverse cultural communities
became a resource for our participants as
they wrestled with their LLA and persisted
in their learning endeavors. As we know,
self-consciousness and anxiety arise unbid-
den, particularly when we do something
new.1 It appears that this common experi-
ence can be viewed as an asset or an
obstacle. We argue that these emotions
can work as powerful motivators for the
exertion that is called for in learning a lan-
guage as an adult. As such, the emphasis
would be on connecting with the target
community, which could be galvanized in a
collaborative, interactive manner. If, on the
other hand, students are told directly or in-
directly that success depends on perfection,
the anxiety is increased as students attempt
to ‘‘perform’’ Spanish communication tasks.
Therefore, the findings of this study suggest
that traditional instructional practices
online and a lack of social language interac-
tion will likely underserve anxious, inter-
culturally minded learners.
The informants’ experiences in formal
instruction and informal language practice
have led them to understand that the goal
of language learning is to acquire a some-
what elusive ‘‘right way’’ to communicate.
They have been led to consider language
as a performance, as if it were fixed and
unitary; they conceptualize Spanish profi-
ciency as a possession. These learners have
identified those who have acquired this
possession (Spanish natives and experts)
and those who have not. They are on a quest
for that prized possession. Yet because they
are motivated to participate fully and
respectfully in the Spanish-speaking com-
499
munity, without specific pedagogic inter-
vention they will likely continue to experi-
ence anxiety throughout their language
learning.
To ground the pedagogic suggestions
this study’s findings imply, we turn to Sfard’s
(1998) work, which proposed that the
traditional understanding of learning as
acquiring knowledge and developing con-
cepts, of knowledge as a personal acqui-
sition and possession of a commodity, falls
within in a learning-as-acquisition meta-
phor. Within this metaphor, the human
mind is ‘‘a container to be filled with certain
materials’’ (Sfard, 1998, p. 5), and the lear-
ner becomes the owner of those materials.
The focus of this metaphor is on knowl-
edge, on product and concept, and on
possession. However, Sfard suggested that
recent research literature on learning and
teaching indicates that this metaphor may
indeed be inadequate to inform researchers’
and instructors’ thinking about learning.
She identified an alternative metaphor
that has recently developedFthe learning-
as-participation metaphor. In this metaphor,
learning activities do not have an end-point
(acquisition), but instead are ongoing
and contextually bound. In other words,
‘‘[l]earning a subject is now conceived of as
a process of becoming a member of a certain
community’’ (Sfard, 1998, p. 6). In contrast
to the acquisition metaphor, the participa-
tion metaphor focuses on knowing, doing,
and partaking.
When applied to language learning, the
acquisition metaphor obliges us to think of
language as rules and facts to be acquired
while we reflect on the complexities of
learning a language (Pavlenko & Lantolf,
2000). However, the adult learners in this
study chose to learn Spanish in order to
participate (more) successfully with diverse
groups of people in their home and work
lives. Their motivations and desired out-
comes force us to reflect on the learning
process as gaining access and sensitively
participating in a certain community of
practice (Lave & Wenger, 1991). Indeed,
Spanish is the participative vehicle needed
500
‘‘to communicate in the language of this
community and act according to its partic-
ular norms’’ (Sfard, 1998, p. 6). Therefore,
we argue that the acquisition metaphor for
these learners is no longer sufficient. In fact,
the participation metaphor obliges lan-
guage instructors to shift the focus of adult
language learning ‘‘to language use in
context and to the issues of affiliation
and belonging’’ (Pavlenko & Lantolf, 2000,
p. 156).
With that said, we are not suggesting an
approach to language teaching devoid of
structure, grammar, vocabulary, and pronun-
ciation instruction. These commoditiesF
knowledge, concepts, and productsFare
indispensable tools needed by language
participants. However, the findings of this
study suggest that online courses that place
those tools at the center of the learning and
assessment experience do not attend to the
needs of anxious language students who are
interested in successfully participating in
the target language outside of class.
Real-world communication, whether
electronic, digital, or F2F, requires flexibil-
ity with respect to cultural and linguistic
appropriateness. We argue that the anxious
participants in this study may represent
a larger group of adult students who
approach language and intercultural com-
petence similarly. As language is a social,
reciprocal exchange, comprehension is a
co-constructed responsibility that is shared
between discussants. Online language class
is an ideal practice field for engaging in
communicative exchanges and grappling
with the anxious responses students will
undoubtedly have in the real world. As
meaning can be conveyed in a variety of
appropriate ways, students need to be aware
of the many linguistic approaches possi-
ble in communication. Accordingly, language
instruction necessarily should value risk-
taking and creativity rather than being
dominated by instructional practices that
primarily inculcate language inflexibility
and dialogic precision. An effective stance
would find instructors considering online
learners as legitimate conversation partners
Fall 2009
and collaborators. We therefore advocate for
an instructional design that incorporates
structural language/grammar components,
but does so in a manner that firmly puts
personal and sociocultural connections and
intercultural communications as the focal
point. Altwerger and Saavedra suggest that
effective language and literacy practices in-
clude ‘‘inquiry-based, meaning-centered’’
instruction that value the experiences and
knowledge students bring with them to the
learning setting (1999, p. viii). Accordingly,
we suggest specific practices here to help
shift the focus from the acquisition meta-
phor to the participation metaphor in online
language instructional settings.
Educators need to assist online adult
learners in identifying and improving their
self-directed learning capacities and in de-
veloping approaches to meet their indi-
vidual learning needs (Grosjean & Sork,
2007). A shift in the course outcome goals
and expectations with learning activities
that develop an online learner community
and that approximate authentic communi-
cative exchanges is the starting point for
instructors. In addition, as adult language
students may have specific learning moti-
vations and participation goals, engaging in
a learning needs and expectations assess-
ment before or at the beginning of the
course opens the student-instructor dia-
logue and sets the stage for learning
partnerships. Online students can be sent
an e-mail with an overview of the course
objectives and a short series of questions
that ask them to indicate their previous ex-
periences with the language, their personal
goals for language learning, and any con-
cerns they may have about language learn-
ing and/or the course. Even a 10% response
rate would provide useful, contextual in-
formation about the specific student popu-
lation context (Vella, 2002).
In addition, while online objective
quizzes and exams (multiple choice, fill-in-
the-blank, true-false) may be appropriate in
assessing the acquisition of specific lan-
guage tools, if those constitute the majority
of the final grade, then the focus of the
Foreign Language Annals
vol. 42, No. 3
learning is not participative or communica-
tive in nature. Instructors can now include
computer-mediated communication (i.e.,
e-mail, online chat rooms, and discussion
boards) that merges the concepts of written
and oral discourse. These activities provide
opportunities for students to use their
newly learned tools in context and have
been shown to provide learners support in
improving authentic communicative profi-
ciency (written and oral) and confidence
(Roed, 2003; Shang, 2005; Simpson, 2005).
In many course management systems, these
communications can be collected in full
and tracked by student, allowing the in-
structor to monitor learner progress. The
instructor can observe (and assess) mean-
ing-making and comprehension via the
natural flow of the communication. Though
all online interaction need not be graded,
scoring guides or rubrics that accompany
periodic discussion assignments can be de-
signed to highlight comprehension among
conversation partners as the pinnacle of
successful work. In addition, microphones
and Webcams come standard on many
laptop and desktop computers, allowing
authentic communication opportunities to
become viable options between student and
instructor, among classmates, and among
native speakers and learners. As technology
improves and becomes accessible to insti-
tutions and students, authentic learning
and practice tasks that develop and support
student interaction and involve the major
language domainsFreading, writing, lis-
tening, and speakingFcan be incorporated
into online language courses with a part-
icipative focus.
Finally, whether text-based or audiovi-
sual interactive tasks are designed, commu-
nicative practice in language classes online
and off needs to offer ways for students to
appropriate the target language and culture
in social situations with native and expert
speakers. Instruction that creates opportu-
nities to consider multiple ways to commu-
nicate an idea in a variety of manners and
settings will aid anxious learners in devel-
oping flexible linguistic abilities and in
501
gaining confidence in negotiating their par-
ticipation in target language communities.
Language practice with native speakers,
experts, and other students provides
opportunities for learners to develop the
intercultural, pragmatic, and grammatical
complexities of language in context. For
anxious learners like the ones in this study,
concentration on participation in the target
language speaking community, rather than
primarily on attempting to obtain the one
‘‘right way’’ of a language, would provide a
supportive environment that connects more
appropriately with their learning needs and
expectations.
A certain limitation of this research is
the small, exclusively female sample. Fur-
ther study is warranted to examine if similar
perceptions about language, intercultural
sensitivity, participation, and LLA are
shared with a larger sample that includes
male students as well. Additional research
into how interlocutors are affected by LLA
would also give insight into participation
and intercultural communication in Span-
ish communities of practice. We know that
regardless of gender or target language pro-
ficiency, in today’s global, sociopolitical
environment adults take their own valua-
tion of ethnic and cultural diversity with
them into language learning processes. A
focus on culture, one’s own and in con-
junction with others, has inspired the way
today’s learners consider many issues, from
politics to education to daily living. In
meeting this need, language instruction
practitioners must also consider their own
personal learning ideologies and narratives.
Today’s adults approach education with a
desire to participate more fully in the ever-
diverse communities our society encom-
passes. Language and culture have always
been linked; yet this study illustrates the
impact of society’s cultural and political
movements on individual learners’ under-
standings of diversity, language, heritage,
and community. As such, our online
pedagogical approaches must be equally as
contextual, participative, and culturally
sensitive.
502
Note
1. The authors thank Elizabeth K. Pond,
LPC, for her contribution to this section.
References
Altwerger, B., & Saavedra, E. R. (1999). Fore-
word. In C. Edelsky (Ed.), Making justice our
project: Teachers working toward critical whole
language practice (pp. vii–xii). Urbana, IL:
National Council of Teachers of English.
Bailey, B. (2002). Language, race and negotia-
tion of identity. A study of Dominican Americans.
New York: LFB Scholarly Publishing.
Bakhtin, M. (1986). Speech genres and other
late essays. (V. McGee, Trans.). Austin: Uni-
versity of Texas Press.
Beauvois, M. H. (1998). Conversations in slow
motion: Computer-mediated communication
in the foreign language classroom. Canadian
Modern Language Review, 54, 198–217.
Block, D. (2003). The social turn in second
language acquisition. Washington, DC: George-
town University Press.
Bogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S. K. (2003). Data
analysis and interpretation of qualitative research
for education (4th ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Bowen, G. A. (2006). Grounded theory and
sensitizing concepts. International Journal of
Qualitative Methods, 5, 1–9.
Campbell, R., & Christian, D. (2003, May).
Directions in research: Intergenerational trans-
mission of heritage languages. Working paper,
University of California at Los Angeles Center
for World Languages.
Carreira, M. (2004). Seeking explanatory ad-
equacy: A dual approach to understanding the
term ‘‘heritage language learner.’’ Heritage
Language Journal, 2, 1–25.
Chen, T., & Chang, G. (2004). The relation-
ship between foreign language anxiety and
learning difficulties. Foreign Language Annals,
37, 279–289.
Cheney, C. O. (2000, March). Combining dis-
tance education and Web applications for a
course on collaboration in special education.
Paper presented at Capitalizing on Leadership
in Rural Education conference, Alexandria,
VA (ERIC Document Reproduction Service
No. ED439889).
Clark, M. C., & Dirkx, J. M. (2008). The
emotional self in adult learning. New Direc-
Fall 2009
tions for Adult and Continuing Education, 120,
89–95.
Cohen, Y., & Norst, M. J. (1989). Fear, de-
pendence and loss of self-esteem: Affective
barriers in second language learning among
adults. RELC Journal, 20, 61–77.
Conrad, D. (2002). Engagement, excitement,
anxiety, and fear: Learners’ experiences of
starting an online course. The American Jour-
nal of Distance Education, 16, 205–226.
Cranton, P. (2000). Planning instruction for adult
learners (2nd ed.). Toronto: Wall & Emerson.
Cuneo, C. J., & Harnish, D. (2002, April). The
lost generation in e-learning: Deep and surface
approaches to online learning. Paper presented
at the Annual Meeting of the American Edu-
cational Research Association, New Orleans,
LA.
Damarin, S. K. (1998). Technology and mul-
ticultural education: The question of
convergence. Theory into Practice, 37, 11–19.
del Valle, J. (2006). U.S. Latinos, la his-
panofonı́a and the language ideologies of high
modernity. In C. Mar-Molinero & M. Stewart
(Eds.), Globalization and language in the Span-
ish-speaking world (pp. 27–46). New York:
Palgrave Macmillan.
Durán-Cerda, D. (2008). Strengthening la
identidad in the heritage learner classroom:
Pedagogical approaches. Hispania, 91, 42–51.
Ganschow, L., & Sparks, R. (1991). Identify-
ing native language difficulties among foreign
language learners in college: A ‘‘foreign’’ lan-
guage learning disability? Journal of Learning
Disabilities, 24, 530–541.
Ganschow, L., & Sparks, R. (1996). Anxiety
about foreign language learning among high
school women. Modern Language Journal, 8,
199–212.
Gardner, R. C., & MacIntyre, P. D. (1993). On
the measurement of affective variables in sec-
ond language learning. Language Learning, 43,
157–194.
Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. (1967). The discovery
of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative re-
search. Chicago: Aldine.
González-Pino, B. (2000). An infusion curric-
ulum for the heritage speaker of Spanish.
Texas Papers in Foreign Language Education, 5,
93–105.
Gregersen, T., & Horwitz, E. K. (2002). Lan-
guage learning and perfectionism: Anxious
and non-anxious language learners’ reactions
Foreign Language Annals
vol. 42, No. 3
to their own oral performance. Modern Lan-
guage Journal, 86, 562–570.
Grosjean, G., & Sork, T. J. (2007). Going on-
line: Uploading learning to the virtual
classroom. New Directions in Adult and Con-
tinuing Education, 113, 13–24.
Hara, N., & Kling, R. (1999). Students’ frus-
trations with a Web-based distance education
course. First Monday, 4. Retrieved March 11,
2009, from http://firstmonday.org/htbin/cgi-
wrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/710/620
Hodne, B. D. (1997). Please speak up: Asian
immigrant students in American college
classrooms. New Directions for Teaching and
Learning, 70, 85–92.
Horwitz, E. K. (1999). Preface. In D. J. Young
(Ed.), Affect in foreign language and second
language learning: A practical guide to creating
a low-anxiety classroom atmosphere (pp. xi–
xiii). Boston: McGraw-Hill College.
Horwitz, E. K., Horwitz, M. B., & Cope, J. A.
(1986). Foreign language classroom anxiety.
Modern Language Journal, 70, 125–132.
Horwtiz, E. K., Horwitz, M. B., & Cope, J. A.
(1991). Foreign language classroom anxiety.
In E. K. Horwitz & D. J. Young (Eds.), Lan-
guage anxiety: From theory and research to
classroom implications (pp. 27–36). Engle-
wood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Jackson, J. (2002). Reticence in second lan-
guage case discussions: Anxiety and
aspirations. System, 30, 65–84.
Kasworm, C. E. (2008). Emotional challenges
of adult learners in higher education. New Di-
rections for Adult and Continuing Education,
120, 27–34.
Kelm, O. R. (1992). The use of synchronous
computer networks in second language in-
struction: A preliminary report. Foreign
Language Annals, 25, 441–454.
Kelsey, K. D., Lindner, J. R., & Dooley, K. E.
(2002). Agricultural education at a distance:
Let’s hear from the students. Journal of Agri-
cultural Education, 43, 24–32.
Knowles, M. S. (1984). Androgogy in action:
Applying modern principles of adult learning.
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Lalonde, R. N., & Gardner, R. C. (1984). In-
vestigating a causal model of second language
acquisition: Where does personality fit? Cana-
dian Journal of Behavioral Science, 15, 224–237.
Lantolf, J., & Pavlenko, A. (2001). (S)econd
(L)anguage (A)ctivity theory: Understanding
503
second language learners as people. In M.
Breen (Ed.), Learner contributions to language
learning (pp. 172–182). London: Longman.
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learn-
ing: Legitimate peripheral participation. New
York: Cambridge University Press.
LeBlanc, L., & Lally, C. (1997). Making the
transition from secondary to postsecondary
Spanish study: Achieving consistency in col-
lege placement for Florida’s students.
Hispania, 80, 124–135.
Leeman, J. (2005). Engaging in critical peda-
gogy: Spanish for native speakers. Foreign
Language Annals, 38, 35–45.
Leeman, J., & Martı́nez, G. (2007). From
identity to commodity: Ideologies of Spanish
in heritage language textbooks. Critical In-
quiry in Language Studies, 4, 35–65.
Lieblich, A., Tuval-Mashiach, R., & Zilber, T.
(1998). Narrative research: Reading, analysis,
and interpretation. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
MacIntyre, P. D., & Charos, C. (1995, June).
Personality, motivation and willingness to com-
municate as predictors of second language
communication. Paper presented at the annual
conference of the Canadian Psychological As-
sociation, Charlottetown, PEI.
MacIntyre, P. D., & Gardner, R. C. (1991).
Language anxiety: Its relationship to other anx-
ieties and to processing in native and second
languages. Language Learning, 41, 513–534.
Madsen, H. S., Brown, B. L., & Jones, R. L.
(1991). Evaluating students’ attitudes toward
second-language tests. In E. K. Horwtiz & D.
J. Young (Eds.), Language anxiety: From theory
and research to classroom implications (pp. 65–
86). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
McLoughlin, C. (1999). Culturally responsive
technology use: Developing an online com-
munity of learners. British Journal of
Educational Technology, 30, 231–243.
Pavlenko, A., & Lantolf, J. P. (2000). Second
language learning as participation and the
(re)construction of selves. In J. P. Lantolf
(Ed.), Sociocultural theory and second language
learning (pp. 155–177). New York: Oxford
University Press.
Polinsky, M., & Kagan, O. (2007). Heritage
languages: In the ‘‘wild’’ and in the classroom.
Language and Linguistics Compass, 1, 368–
395.
Potowski, K. (2002). Experiences of Spanish
heritage speakers in university foreign lan-
504
guage courses and implications for teacher
training. ADFL Bulletin, 33, 35–42.
Price, M. L. (1991). The subjective experience
of foreign language anxiety: Interviews with
anxious students. In E. K. Horwitz & D. Young
(Eds.), Language anxiety: From theory and re-
search to classroom implications (pp. 141–150).
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Reeder, K., MacFadyen, L. P., Roche, J., &
Chase, M. (2004). Negotiating cultures in
cyberspace: Participation patterns and prob-
lematics. Language Learning & Technology, 8,
88–105.
Riessman, C. K. (2008). Narrative methods for
the human sciences. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Reynard, R. (2003, March). Using the Internet
as an instructional tool: ESL distance learning.
In Teaching, learning, & technology: The chal-
lenge continues. Proceedings of the Annual
Mid-South Instructional Technology Confer-
ence, Murfreesboro, TN.
Roca, A. (1997). La realidad en el aula: Logros
y expectatı́vos en la enseñanza del español para
estudiantes bilingues. In M. Colombi &
F. Alarcón (Eds.), La enseñanza del español
a hispanohablantes (pp 55–64). Boston:
Houghton Mifflin.
Roca, A., & Colombi, M. C. (2003). Mi lengua:
Spanish as a heritage language in the United
States. Washington, DC: Georgetown Univer-
sity Press.
Roed, J. (2003). Language learner behaviour
in a virtual environment. Computer Assisted
Language Learning, 16, 155–172.
Saunders, N. G., Malm, L. D., Malone, B. G.,
Nay, F. W., Oliver, B. E., & Thompson, J. C. Jr.
(1998). Student perspectives: Responses to
Internet opportunities in a distance learning
environment. Mid-Western Educational Re-
searcher, 11, 8–18.
Sfard, A. (1998). On two metaphors for learn-
ing and the dangers of choosing just one.
Educational Researcher, 27, 4–13.
Shang, H.-F. (2005). Email dialogue journa-
ling: Attitudes and impact on L2 reading
performance. Educational Studies, 31, 197–212.
Simpson, J. (2005). Learning electronic liter-
acy skills in an online language learning
community. Computer Assisted Language
Learning, 18, 327–345.
Skehan, P. (1991). Individual differences in
second language learning. Studies in Second
Language Acquisition, 13, 275–298.
Fall 2009
Stolovitch, H. D., & Keeps, E. J. (2002). Tell-
ing ain’t training. Alexandria, VA: American
Society for Training & Development Press.
Suárez, D. (2002). The paradox of linguistic
hegemony and the maintenance of Spanish as
a heritage language in the United States. Jour-
nal of Multilingual and Multicultural Develop-
ment, 23, 512–530.
Toribio, A. (2002). Spanish-English code-
switching among U.S. Latinos. International
Journal of the Sociology of Language, 158, 89–
119.
Train, R. W. (2007). ‘‘Real Spanish’’: Historical
perspectives on the ideological construction
of a foreign language. Critical Inquiry in Lan-
guage Studies, 4, 207–235.
Urciuoli, B. (1996). Exposing prejudice. Boul-
der, CO: Westview Press.
Valdés, G. (2005). Bilingualism, heritage lan-
guage learners, and SLA research: Opportu-
nities lost or seized? Modern Language Journal,
89, 411–425.
Valdés, G., Fishman, J., Chávez, R., & Pérez,
W. (2006). Developing minority language re-
sources: The case of Spanish in California.
Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.
Vella, J. (2002). Learning to listen. Learning to
teach (Rev. ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind and society: The
development of higher mental processes. Cam-
bridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Walls, J. (1994). Global networking for local
development: Task focus and relationship
focus in cross-cultural communication. In
L. Harasim (Ed.), Global networks (pp. 153–
166). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Wright, D. A. (2000). Culture as information
and culture as affective process: A compara-
tive study. Foreign Language Annals, 33, 330–
341.
Young, D. J. (1991). Creating a low-anxiety
classroom environment: What does language
anxiety research suggest? Modern Language
Journal, 75, 426–437.
Young, D. J. (1999). A perspective on foreign
language learning: From body to mind to
emotions. In D. J. Young (Ed.), Affect in foreign
language and second language learning: A prac-
tical guide to creating a low-anxiety classroom
atmosphere (pp. 13–23). Boston: McGraw-Hill
College.
Zentella, A. C. (1997). Growing up bilingual.
Malden, MA: Blackwell.