Acquisition of Spanish as a Foreign Language Through the Socioeducational Model

Abstract

This study analyzes the learning of Spanish as a foreign language from a perspective based on Gardner’s socioeducational model. Two different studies are presented. The first study verifies the viability of the socioeducational model in Chinese university students who are learning either in linguistic and cultural immersion (Spain) or in their original culture (China). The results show that Gardner’s model is appropriate but some of the variables are restructured. Based on this, the second study includes some variables specifically linked to Chinese culture. The model is tested through cross-cultural analysis in two samples from China and the United States. The findings are interpreted in relation to the cultural characteristics of the sample studied. Theoretical, empirical, and practical implications are also discussed.

Keywords

socioeducational model Spanish foreign language immersion/nonimmersion context Chinese culture

From a psychosocial perspective, it can be stated that learning a second or foreign language (FL) involves two kinds of tasks: cognitive tasks—skills—and affective tasks—attitudes—both of which coexist independently (Gardner, 1985b). There can be no doubt that some of the individual’s affective variables exert an influence on the acquisition of both linguistic and nonlinguistic outcomes. Some studies suggest that the success of learning can be explained by a complex and dynamic set involving cognition and internal emotion, external incentives, and social context (Gan, Humphreys, & Hamp-Lyons, 2004).

A socioeducational model conceptualizes how skills and attitudes contribute to the learning process. It defines four specific constructs involved in the acquisition of a second language: integrativeness, attitude toward the learning situation, motivation, and anxiety. This theoretical model proposes that skills and motivation facilitate acquisition, whereas anxiety weakens this effect. The formal or informal contexts in which the student participates, and the learning environment of a second language or FL, are inevitably added to this learning process. Different theories on the learning of an FL have undoubtedly accepted that highly motivated students—in addition to other relevant factors in the process—have a greater possibility of achieving success in the acquisition of the target language.

The studies conducted in this field using the Attitude/Motivation Test Battery (AMTB), a tool designed by Gardner (1985a) to measure a student’s attitudes and motivation, have confirmed the existence of two kinds of motivational orientation in FL students. On one hand, there is instrumental orientation, consisting of a motivation to study in order to attain pragmatic utilitarian benefits linked to that FL. On the other, there is integrative orientation, construed as an interest to interact socially or symbolically with the community and culture of the target language. This concept of integrativeness is composed of an interest in FLs, the desire to interact with a language community, and attitudes toward the FL. In other words, it includes the student’s assessment of learning an FL as a positive attitude toward the target language’s community, an integrative orientation in language study, and an interest in FLs in general.

It has been established on numerous occasions that the acquisition of a second language is facilitated by an integrative motivation to learn the language. However, despite the fact that most parts of Asia are still strongly influenced by the models developed in the West in the paradigm set by the teaching of English as a Second Language, they are aware that the model is based on behavioral rules and social structures that exist in the West (Hanassab & Tidwel, 2002; Huntley, 1993; Pan et al., 2001). Studies such as those applied to Canadian students (Clément, Gardner, & Smythe, 1980), Finnish students (Laine, 1977), American students (Muchnick & Wolfe, 1982), Turkish students (Atay & Kurt, 2010), and others can, for example, be highlighted. Hence, studies based on this same theoretical model are currently being carried out in Asian cultural contexts, highlighting the strong influence exerted on a person’s attitudes by the culture of origin (Chen, Warden, & Chang, 2005; Gao & Trent, 2009).

Without proposing to generalize with regard to the Pan-Asian community, the findings on the motivation that exists among Chinese students have been fairly clear and question the “Western” model of how motivation in the area of FL learning should be measured (Johnson & Kachru, 1994; Sridhar, 1994). The existence of universal motivational parameters should therefore be reviewed to give cultural influence a more relevant role. As mentioned above, the results obtained do not confirm the existence of an integrative motivational orientation as a precursor to motivation, unlike most of the research conducted in the West to date. It should be noted that the main factor in successful acquisition of an FL is not a student’s motivational orientation but rather the subsequent step, namely, the level of motivation. However, a group of factors, which lie within the framework of instrumental motivational orientation, do indeed exist, along with a new concept that also forms part of the typology or conceptualization of motivational orientation, namely, “required motivation,” as it has been termed in various studies (Gan et al., 2004; Warden & Lin, 2000). Chinese students have specific cultural motivators because their culture is immersed in Buddhism, Taoism, Neo-Confucianism, and others, all of which have their own intrinsic nuances. The influence exerted by the government and a collective mentality are also key factors in this culture (Dalin & Garayzábal, 2006).

Emphasis should be placed on the influence exerted by the learning context. That is to say, account should be taken of the influence exerted by the formal (academic) and informal contexts of immersion (study abroad) and nonimmersion (study in the country of origin). In short, it is necessary to take into consideration whether learning takes place as a result of the teaching of an FL or the teaching of a second language.

Nonetheless, current research recognized by the aforementioned authors has corroborated that the tools created and tested to measure a student’s attitudes/motivation within a second language learning process can be applied to the learning of an FL, as this study aims to do. The data concerning the measures’ reliability should confirm this.

Finally, we have considered a variable which is, hypothetically, more strongly linked to Asiatic cultural values than to those of the West. This variable is denominated as “parental encouragement,” which responds to a connotation of respect for authority and parental influence in Chinese culture. Gardner (1985b) identified that parents’ attitudes and the home environment may have an influence on linguistic competence in an FL via attitudes toward the community of the language being studied. He identified two possible roles in a second-language learning process: one that is passive, in which parents’ aptitudes and attitudes toward the second-language community play an important role; and another that is active, in which parents support their children by monitoring their performance in the second language in parallel (Asgari, 2010).

On the basis of what has been set out above, this article aims to address the following objectives through two studies:

Study 1:

To analyze the reliability of measurement instruments for the main variables involved in Gardner’s (1985a) educational model within the context of the learning/teaching of Spanish as an FL among Chinese students.

To explore the relationships between the different variables involved in Gardner’s (1985b) educational model within the aforementioned context.

To analyze differences among the variables involved in Gardner’s (1985b) educational model with regard to both immersion and nonimmersion in the target culture environment, and at the level of target language acquisition.

Study 2:

4. To develop our own model, which will combine Gardner’s (1985b) socioeducational model with variables that are closely linked to Chinese culture—“parental encouragement” and “required orientation.” The research participants were Chinese and American native students, thus allowing us to verify whether the variables added are specifically linked to a determined culture, and to corroborate which constructs have the most influence on motivation.

Study 1

Method

Participants

Data gathering took place between the months of September 2009 and May 2010. This process was carried out by contacting Spanish Language Departments in Spanish and Chinese Universities. The sample was composed of 150 Chinese university students of Spanish, 58% of whom were studying in China and 42% in Spain. Their average age was 20.79 years (SD = 1.72), and this variable was distributed between 17 and 27 years of age. With regard to gender, 66.67% were female students and 33.33% were male. More than 65% of the participants had been studying Spanish for more than a year. With regard to the level attained, 54.67% were beginners and 45.33% were intermediate/advanced students.

Instruments

A self-administrated questionnaire was designed based on an adaptation of the AMTB (Gardner, 1985a) to the context of Chinese university students of Spanish. The questionnaire was translated into Chinese using an independent back-translation process. Specifically, the following variables were considered:

Interest in learning a foreign language (IntFL): 10 items

Attitude toward learning Spanish (AttLS): 11 items

Attitudes toward Spanish people (AttSpPeop): 12 items

Integrative orientation (IntegrOr): 4 items

Instrumental orientation (InstrOr): 4 items

Anxiety in Spanish class (Anxiety): 5 items

Motivational intensity (MI): 10 items

Desire to study Spanish (DSS): 9 items

Evaluation of the teacher (ETeach): 24 bipolar adjectives

Evaluation of the course (ECourse): 22 bipolar adjectives

The first six variables were measured on a 5-point Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree); MI and DSS were measured in three alternative formats from which you just have to choose one; and ETeach and ECourse were measured on a 7-point semantic differential scale.

Last, the questionnaire concluded with sociodemographic variables, such as age, gender, immersion, or nonimmersion learning context where target language was studied (Spain or China, respectively) and language level acquired. This last variable was measured through the course in which they were enrolled (beginners and intermediate/advance level).

Results

In order to attain the first objective, preliminary analyses were performed to select the best items from the total items included in the questionnaire. The items were selected on the basis of specific psychometric criteria: corrected item–total correlation higher than .30, interitem correlations within scales higher than the correlations between scales, unifactorial structure in an exploratory factor analysis, and internal consistency through the ordinal alpha (Gadermann, Guhn, & Zumbo, 2012). The results of this analysis and the descriptive statistics of the 10 depurated scales are shown in Table 1. The results indicate that the measures used have an acceptable degree of reliability, and it is likewise striking that practically all of them coincide with those originally used by Gardner (1985a).

Table 1.

Descriptive Statistics and Reliability Analysis of the Scales.

Scale	No. of items	Minimum	Maximum	M	SD	Ordinal α
IntFL	10	1	5	4.22	0.56	.87
AttLS	9	1	5	4.21	0.48	.82
AttSpPeop	13	1	5	3.79	0.54	.88
IntegrOr	4	1	5	4.22	0.74	.86
InstrOr	4	1	5	4.00	0.77	.80
Anxiety	5	1	5	2.75	0.91	.89
MI	10	1	3	2.41	0.35	.84
DSS	9	1	3	2.70	0.32	.84
ECourse	10	1	7	5.53	0.74	.87
ETeach	10	1	7	5.93	0.86	.87

Note. IntFL = interest in learning a foreign language; AttLS = attitude toward learning Spanish; AttSpPeop = attitude toward Spanish people; IntegrOr = integrative orientation; InstrOr = instrumental orientation; Anxiety = anxiety in Spanish classes; MI = motivational intensity; DSS = desire to study Spanish; ECourse = course assessment; ETeach = teacher assessment.

In pursuit of the second objective, a principal components analysis with varimax rotation was then conducted to explore the possible existence of a structure underlying the set of 10 measurement scales that would indicate how they are interrelated. After initial analysis, it was observed that the extracted communality in the case of anxiety was highly reduced (.24), which led us to consider this construct separately and to then repeat the principal components analysis with the nine remainders. The results obtained with regard to the analysis’ adequacy were satisfactory—Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin measure of sampling adequacy (KMO) = .804; Bartlett’s test of sphericity, χ²(df) = 669.285(36), p < .01—and three components were obtained, which explain 76.21% of the total variance (see Table 2).

Table 2.

Varimax Rotation Matrix as a Result of the Principal Components Analysis.

	Component
Scale	1	2	3
IntegrOr	.89	.14	.07
IntFL	.87	.10	.13
InstrOr	.82	.10	.01
AttLS	.80	.22	.28
AttSpPeop	.73	.23	.01
ETeach	.15	.91	.04
ECourse	.25	.88	.04
DSS	.01	.05	.88
MI	.20	.02	.85
Percentage S²	39.19	19.37	17.65

Note. IntFL = interest in learning a foreign language; AttLS = attitude toward learning Spanish; AttSpPeop = attitude toward Spanish people; IntegrOr = integrative orientation; InstrOr = instrumental orientation; MI = motivational intensity; DSS = desire to study Spanish; ECourse = course assessment; ETeach = teacher assessment. Boldface indicates highest factor loadings.

As can be observed in Table 2, all the measures associated with both expressing attitudes toward Spanish as an FL and the target community, are grouped together in the first component, which represents both its instrumental value and its value for integration into the Spanish culture. This component has been denominated as “attitude toward integration.” The second component is connected to the learning situation and groups together attitudes toward the course and the teacher. This component has been labeled as “attitudes toward the learning situation” (Gardner, 2010). Last, there is a third component, which groups together variables connected with the motivation to learn, such as motivational intensity and the desire to learn Spanish. This component has been labeled as “motivation.”

To achieve the third objective, a two-factor analysis of variance (nonimmersion/immersion context, i.e., China vs. Spain; and level of Spanish acquisition, i.e., beginner vs. intermediate/advanced) was performed on each of the four components or dependent variables. Results shown in Table 3 reveal some statistically significant differences among participants. With regard to anxiety, there are significant differences in both the context and the level of Spanish acquired. The nonimmersion context students had higher levels of anxiety than those in immersion context. In the case of acquisition level, beginners had more anxiety than intermediate/advanced students. Nevertheless, the interaction of the context and acquisition level did not have a significant influence on anxiety.

Table 3.

Analyses of Variance as Regards Integration, Learning Situation, Motivation, and Anxiety, Depending on Context (Spain vs. China) and Level of Spanish Attained (Beginner vs. Intermediate/Advanced).

			Context				Level
	Corrected model		M_Spain (SD)	M_China (SD)			M_Beginner (SD)	M_Inter/adv (SD)			Context * Level
Dependent variable	F(3, 146)	Partial η²	N = 63	N = 87	F(1, 146)	Partial η²	N = 82	N = 68	F(1, 146)	Partial η²	F(1, 146)	Partial η²
Integration	3.85**	.07	4.20 (0.51)	4.01 (0.52)	5.09**	.03	4.16 (0.46)	4.01 (0.58)	.21	.00	5.36**	.04
Learning situation	.49	.01	5.68 (0.75)	5.77 (0.73)	0.64	.00	5.76 (0.72)	5.70 (0.77)	.30	.00	.35	.00
Motivation	2.95**	.06	2.59 (0.24)	2.52 (0.32)	4.53**	.03	2.55 (0.24)	2.56 (0.34)	1.68	.01	6.23**	.04
Anxiety	4.99***	.09	2.52 (0.87)	2.91 (0.90)	10.25***	.07	2.86 (0.90)	2.62 (0.90)	5.87**	.04	.37	.00

p < .05. ***p < .01.

In the case of the integration and motivation variables, on analyzing the principal effects, it was discovered that context is significant, but acquisition level is not. Those students who learn Spanish outside China therefore have a higher score as regards both integration and motivation. Moreover, in both constructs, there were significant mean differences for the interaction of context and acquisition level.

A more precise interpretation of these findings can be made on the basis of the results shown in Figure 1. There is an interaction effect among the intermediate/advanced level students and the context. For these students, the fact of studying in an immersion environment is translated into a higher average score as regards both integration and motivation. However, this interaction effect was not significant for beginners.

Figure 1.

Profile plots with which to evaluate the interaction effect (Context * Level) on integration and motivation.

Discussion

In brief, the results of the first study have allowed us to obtain a reconfiguration of Gardner’s (1985b) socioeducational model, in addition to other inferences which are described below. The results obtained can be interpreted as complementary to the discoveries of Gardner, focusing specifically on the learning of Spanish as an FL for Chinese people.

With regard to methodological issues, it is worth pointing out that the measures used have an acceptable degree of reliability, and almost all of them coincide with those originally used by Gardner (1985a). It can therefore be concluded that the measures designed by this author as part of the socioeducational model could be generalized to include the scope of Chinese culture.

A factorial analysis of the scales taken into consideration in Gardner’s (1985a) socioeducational model leads to a reconfiguration of the factors that form part of Spanish as an FL learning, namely, attitude toward integration, attitude toward the learning situation, motivation and anxiety. The attitude toward integration construct has several variables in common with the original concept (denominated “integrativeness” by Gardner, 1985b), such as integrative orientation, interest in FLs, and attitudes toward Spanish people. However, two differences can be outlined: (1) This construct groups together instrumental orientation and integrative orientation, a result that had previously been pointed out by Dörnyei (1998) and (2) It also includes attitudes toward learning Spanish, which was categorized by Gardner (1985b) within the motivation construct.

With respect to the context, there are significant differences in integration, motivation, and anxiety constructs, but not in learning situation. Results show that students who learn Spanish in Spain have more positive attitudes toward integration and are more motivated than those who learn in China. These results can be interpreted in several ways. Real contact with the target language and culture, may, undoubtedly, contribute to increase positive attitudes toward integration and motivation to learn the target language.

However, there is another interpretation referring to the need to adapt existing theoretical models on acquisition of an FL, tested only in the West, to the Asian context. It may be that learners in China do not score as highly as those in Spain because their motivation and attitudes toward FL are forged from other variables, such as required orientation or parental reinforcement. This clearly supports cultural influence on learning and educational tradition, two concepts that Gardner (2010) emphasizes as the main constructs influencing motivation during the learning process.

With regard to anxiety, students in China paradoxically show greater anxiety than those in Spain. Given the traditional educational profiles of Chinese students (e.g., passive learning, structured methodology based on repetition and memorizing, communicative scope not considered as a priority), it may seem somewhat surprising that, when placed in a methodological atmosphere in which the student is seen as the main character, and where teaching is based on a process rather than on results, they show less anxiety when studying in Spain than they do in their native country. Starting from the premise that students have the required motivational orientation as the main reason to study Spanish, distancing students from parental and academic requirements, along with the intense rivalry among classmates, may perhaps lead to a greater interest in learning Spanish, since those situations that cause anxiety could be eliminated.

Regarding level, there are only significant differences in anxiety. The more familiarity the student has with the target language, the less anxiety they have in using it. Finally, significant differences are noticed with respect to interaction context and level. Intermediate/advanced level students who were studying in Spain have a higher score on integration and motivation compared with peer learners studying in China. In this case, the hypothesis of cultural influence, especially in the field of education, would be strengthened.

Study 2

During this research, and after evaluating the results from the study shown above, we decided to carry out a second study designed, on one hand, to allow us to put forward such hypotheses as could be inferred from the results of the first study and, on the other, to develop our own structural model considering those variables that are intrinsically linked to the culture of origin. The principal contrast criteria used in this study was a transcultural sample consisting of students of Chinese and American origin—East versus West—allowing us to stress whether certain variables are really proper to a determined culture. This strengthens the hypothesis that the culture of origin has a greater influence than the other two variables of which the learning process is formed. We should therefore highlight outstanding theories in the psychosociolinguistic field, such as that of Dörnyei (1998) and his process orientation model, that of Clément (1980) and his social context model, intergroup theory of (Giles & Byrne, 1982), or the socioeducational model itself (Gardner, 1985b).

Since our intention was to develop unknown aspects that had appeared in the results of the first study, our first objective was to corroborate the existence of a required motivational orientation, along with other variables connected to Chinese culture, such as significant aspects for the set of Chinese students. This led to changes being made to the original instrument, principally owing to the need to prioritize the importance of cultural and contextual influence.

This new approach allowed us to create our own structural model regarding the learning process of an FL, while simultaneously verifying the differences and similarities between Gardner’s (1985b) original model and the results obtained in Study 1.

Method

Participants

Information was gathered between the months of January 2011 and December 2012. In the second study, the total sample size of the subjects surveyed consisted of 412 students, 173 of whom were Chinese and 239 were American, studying Spanish as an FL in China and the United States, respectively. In both cases, the students were at universities that had Spanish or Modern Language departments. With regard to the American students, the average age was 22.08 years (SD = 4.25), 84.1% of them were women, and 60.25% had been studying Spanish for more than 2 years. With regard to the Chinese students, 87.86% were women, 57.23% of them had studied Spanish for more than 2 years, and their average age was 21.73 years (SD = 2.93). No significant differences were found in these variables between Chinese and American students.

Instruments

The instrument designed for the second study consisted of three highly defined sections, which are described below:

All those measures that had provided good results in Study 1 and were of interest for the Study 2 objectives were selected (IntFL, AttSpPeop, IntegrOr, InstrOr. Anxiety, MI and DSS), but modified according to Gardner’s (2004) updated AMTB version. ETeach and ECourse, from Study 1, were also considered but in a Likert-type format in order to get more coherence in response format. Finally, parental encouragement (ParenEn) from Gardner’s (1985a) AMTB, and required motivational orientation (RequOr), from Warden and Lin (2000), were also considered. All items in this section were measured on a 5-point Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree).

Following the European Reference Framework, and to categorize the language level attained as beginner (A1-A2), intermediate (B1), or advanced (B2), the Spanish Virtual Classroom Classification Test (Cervantes Institute, 2011) was used. This consisted of 18 questions corresponding to the aforementioned levels of Spanish acquisition. Sociodemographic and contextual variables, such as place where students learn Spanish (China or United States), age, gender, time studying Spanish, and use of Spanish in their family milieu (yes or no).

Results

Two structural equation models for the samples of Chinese and American students were estimated based on the partial least squares (PLS) approach using SmartPLS 2.0. The results allowed us to assess the reliability and convergent validity of the instruments in both countries. In the case of China, the ordinal α varied between .6 for attitudes toward integration and required orientation, and .91, for the evaluation of the teacher whereas the lowest value in the case of the United States was for attitudes toward integration, with an ordinal α of .61. All the loadings were significantly different from zero (p < .05) and above 0.4, the only exception being AttSpPeop, which had a load of 0.37 in the attitudes toward integration construct in the estimation model for Chinese students. With respect to the discriminant validity, and according to the criterion of Fornell and Larcker (1981), it was verified that the average variance extracted from each concept was higher than the square of the correlation of any other construct. Furthermore, the invariance of the PLS measurement tool was verified in a sequential manner (Gómez, García, & Molina, 2013): (a) configuration invariance (guaranteed by the use of the same instrument in each country) and (b) metric invariance (provided by the equality of the loadings estimated in each country). In this respect, the loadings were invariant for the models in China and in the United States for all constructs (PLS-MGA >.05), thus verifying the invariance metric. A detailed report of all analyses, including separate analyses for each country, can be obtained from the first author.

Having verified the quality in both models, we then went on to fulfill the objectives proposed with regard to the multigroup analysis (MGA). We first carried out separate analyses of the path coefficients of the models for China and the United States. Once this had been done, we proceeded to make comparisons between the students in both countries with the objective of identifying the differences between the relationships considered (Figure 2). Beginning with the model for the Chinese students, we observed whether their attitudes with respect to their learning situation, integration, required orientation, and parental encouragement had a positive and significant influence on motivation. The level of Spanish attained depended directly on motivation. The effect of the control variables on the level attained was also coherent with what was expected a priori, since those students who had spent more than 2 years studying Spanish and who used the language in their home environment attained a higher level of Spanish. Anxiety during the use of Spanish was negatively and closely related to motivation, indicating that an increase in motivation has a bearing on the reduction in anxiety experienced by the student when using this language. In the same respect, the increase in the level and the amount of time that Spanish has been studied also contributes toward reducing anxiety, whereas the effect of using the language in the home environment on anxiety was not significantly different to zero. With regard to the model estimated for the American students, the results show a direct and significantly different association with zero among motivation and the concepts of attitude toward the learning situation, attitude toward integration and required orientation. The level of Spanish was higher for those students who had spent more than 2 years studying it, who used it in their home environment and who were more motivated. Anxiety was principally reduced as the levels of Spanish and motivation increased, although it was also lower for those students who had spent longer studying Spanish and who habitually used it in their home environment.

Figure 2.

Model for the acquisition of Spanish by students in China and the United States.

Finally, the multigroup analysis (carried out to compare the path coefficients for both models) shows the existence of certain differences between Chinese and American students. To facilitate the interpretation of these results, the path coefficients in which differences were detected (PLS-MGA <.05) are marked with (H) for highest value and (L) for lowest value in Figure 2.

Beginning with the endogenous construct of motivation, differences will be observed in the path coefficients estimated for three of the predictors or exogenous concepts. More specifically, it was verified that attitudes toward integration have a positive and significant influence on motivation with regard to both American (β_USA = .40, p < .01) and Chinese students (β_China = .26, p < .01), although the contribution of the former when generating motivation was greater than that of the latter (PLS-MGA = .043). In the case of required orientation, this concept had a positive and significant impact on the motivation of Spanish students in both countries (β_China = .17, p < .05; β_USA = .09, p < .1), but the Chinese considered motivation to be more important than the Americans did (PLS-MGA = .038). In relation to parental encouragement, it was observed that the Chinese students’ motivation was determined in a positive manner that was significantly different to zero (β_China = .12, p < .05), whereas this construct’s contribution toward motivation was not significantly different to zero in the model estimated with Spanish students in the United States (β_USA = .03, p > .1). The p valor of the PLS-MGA (.044) confirms this.

With respect to anxiety while using Spanish, it was observed that this depended negatively, and in a form significantly distant to zero, on motivation (β_China = −.39, p < .01; β_USA = −.24, p < .01) and level (β_China = −.22, p < .01; β_USA = −.41, p < .01) for the students in both countries. Nevertheless, the reduction in the American students’ anxiety was principally explained by the increase in level (PLS-MGA = .013), whereas that of the Chinese was mainly due to an increase in motivation (PLS-MGA = .028).

Discussion

This second study has confirmed that the following constructs: “attitudes toward integration,” “attitudes toward learning situation,” “motivation,” and “anxiety,” are valid components to be taken into account in the learning process. However, in addition to other slight variations that will be described below, two significant particularities were produced which are closely linked to the improvements made to the AMTB in Study 2, and which are related to the inclusion of the variables that are hypothetically linked to the culture of origin: “parental encouragement” and “required motivational orientation.” These two variables, according to the structural model established, are added as variables that have a significant influence on the motivation construct. The configuration of the socioeducational model in Study 2 can thus be summarized as follows:

The “attitudes toward integration” construct is configured following Study 1. The second construct considered in the present model, “attitudes toward learning situation,” has proved to be exactly the same as in Study 1 and in Gardner (1985b). Nevertheless, it should be stressed that, in the case of the Chinese students, this construct has proved more influential in motivation to learn than the construct “attitudes toward integration,” which supports some of the hypotheses posed by Dörnyei (1998). An interesting result is that “required motivational orientation” appeared as a relevant construct in both samples. This variable covers reasons that express obligation to learn an FL. It supposes, in the majority of its dimensions, academic requirements which are, on occasions, as in the case of the Chinese, closely linked to both cultural beliefs and values, and educational experiences. Finally, and solely in the case of the model with Chinese students, results showed that the construct “parental encouragement” influences motivation. This construct proposes that the home environment, and specifically parents, participate in the learning of a second language. These results, supported by previous works (Asgari, 2010; Gardner, 1985b; Li, 2007), also show that if parents have a certain level of education, this may be beneficial with regard to supporting their children in second-language learning.

The motivation construct continues to be composed of the variables “desire to study Spanish” and “motivational intensity,” with no significant variation.

Anxiety has emerged as a one-dimensional construct, in which the measures “use anxiety” and “class anxiety” are merged into one single factor. It should be stressed that the reduction in anxiety in the sample of Chinese students is mainly explained by the increase in motivation and not to such a great extent by the level of Spanish, as occurred with the American students.

As regards the objective of exploring which variables have most influence on the motivation construct as a driving force in the learning process, “attitude toward learning situation” has a high impact in both cases, be it China or the United States. However, the influence of “attitude toward learning situation” on motivation is greater in the case of Chinese students. Second, “attitudes toward integration” influences on the “motivation” construct. In this case, American students are more identified with integration than the Chinese. Third, it can be observed that one of the variables added to Gardner’s (1985b) original model, that of “orientation required,” is positioned as a new relevant construct that also participates in the influence of motivation in both groups. However, the value obtained for the estimated parameter in the relationship between this variable and motivation in Chinese students is greater than that obtained in the case of the American students. Studies such as those of Gao (2006), Warden and Lin (2000), Chen et al. (2005), or Liu (1998), have already diagnosed that requirements, obligations, and so on are factors that should be considered during the learning of both an FL and any other knowledge area when dealing with Chinese students. Finally, it is necessary to point out another significant finding which implies a fourth construct: “parental encouragement.” This factor has already been considered in Gardner’s (1985b) socioeducational model. Parents are a reference in Chinese culture’s values and beliefs that cannot be ignored when attempting to conciliate the intrinsic values of the concept of a “good Chinese individual.” Parental encouragement has proved to be a construct with a significant influence on motivation, but exclusively in respect to the set of Chinese students. It had absolutely no significance for American students.

With regard to the level of Spanish, there is a direct relation with motivation. Moreover, and as was to be expected, those students who had spent more than 2 years studying, and used Spanish in the social milieu, had a higher level.

Regarding anxiety, in the case of the American students, four factors have proved to be significant in reducing it: increase in motivation, increase in level of Spanish, time spent studying Spanish, and contact with or use of Spanish in the social milieu. In the case of the Chinese students, there were three factors, although the influence of contact with or use of Spanish in the social milieu did not have a significant influence on the reduction of anxiety. Motivation and level of Spanish, despite being two of the principal factors for both groups, differ in their importance, since the Americans mainly reduced anxiety by increasing their level of Spanish, whereas the Chinese did so mainly by increasing their motivation.

In conclusion, it should be stated that the culture of origin, especially the educational setting, has an important weight in the process of learning Spanish as an FL, and the class routine should therefore always be taken into consideration. Future research should continue with this approach in the context of learning in immersion in order to be able to rule out the theory that the educative environment has significantly more influence than cultural origin or any other construct that is a part of the learning of an FL, in this specific case, Spanish.

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

The authors wish to thank the anonymous reviewer for their helpful comments on an earlier version of this article.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Author Biographies

Aranzazu Bernardo is an assistant professor at the University of Castilla-La Mancha, Spain. She is the head of the Academic Area of the Spanish as Foreign Language Program (ESTO). Her research examines extralinguistic factors in the acquisition of Spanish as a foreign language.

Maria Amérigo is a lecturer in social psychology in the Department of Psychology, Faculty of Humanities, at the University of Castilla-La Mancha, Spain. Her primary research interests lie in the area of environmental psychology, particularly attitudes toward natural and built environment. A selection of her research publications can be viewed at

Juan A. García is an assistant lecturer in the Department of Marketing at the University of Castilla-La Mancha, Spain. His research interests include consumer behavior, environmental psychology, and time studies. His research has been published in several international journals.

References

Asgari

(2010). The influence of informal language learning environment (parents & home environment) on the vocabulary learning strategies. English Language Teaching, 1, 7-13.

Atay

Kurt

(2010). The socio-educational model of second language acquisition: The Turkish context. Procedia—Social and Behavioral Sciences, 1, 3088-3093.

Cervantes Institute. (2011). Test de Clasificación. Aula Virtual de Español (AVE) [Classification Test: Spanish Virtual Classroom]. Measurement instrument. Retrieved from http://ave.cervantes.es/prueba_nivel/registro/test_de_clasificacion.php?origen=webAVE

Chen

Warden

Chang

(2005). Motivators that do not motivate: The case of Chinese EFL learners and the influence of culture on motivation. TESOL Quarterly, 39, 609-634.

Clément

(1980). Ethnicity, contact and communicative competence in a second language. In Giles

Robinson

W. P.

Smith

P. M.

(Eds.), Language: Social psychological perspective (pp. 147-154). Toronto, Ontario, Canada: Pergamon Press.

Clément

Gardner

R. C.

Smythe

(1980). Social and individual factors in second language acquisition. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, 12, 292-302.

Dalin

Garayzábal

(2006). El español en China: Aproximación a los antecedentes educativos y su situación actual [Spanish in China: An approach to its educational background and current situation]. Cuadernos Cervantes de la Lengua Española, 63, 6-21.

Dörnyei

(1998). Motivation in second and foreign language learning. Language Teaching, 31, 117-135.

Fornell

Larcker

D. F.

(1981). Evaluating structural equations models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18, 39-50.

10.

Gadermann

A. M.

Guhn

Zumbo

B. D.

(2012). Estimating ordinal reliability for Likert-type and ordinal item response data: A conceptual, empirical, and practical guide. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 17(3). Retrieved from http://pareonline.net/pdf/v17n3.pdf

11.

Gan

Humphreys

Hamp-Lyons

(2004). Understanding successful and unsuccessful EFL students in Chinese universities. Modern Language Journal, 88, 229-244.

12.

Gao

(2006). Understanding Chinese students’ teacher-dependence. In Farrell

T. S. C.

(Ed.), Language teacher research in Asia (pp. 61-74). Alexandria, VA: TESOL.

13.

Gao

Trent

(2009). Understanding mainland Chinese students’ motivations for choosing teacher education programmes in Hong Kong. Journal of Education for Teaching: International Research and Pedagogy, 35, 145-159.

14.

Gardner

R. C.

(1985a). Attitude/Motivation Test Battery: Technical report. London, Ontario, Canada: University of Western Ontario.

15.

Gardner

R. C.

(1985b). Social psychology and second language learning: The role of attitudes and motivation. London, England: Edward Arnold.

16.

Gardner

R. C.

(2004). Attitude/Motivation Test Battery: International AMTB research project. London, Ontario, Canada: University of Western Ontario.

17.

Gardner

R. C.

(2010). Motivation and second language acquisition: The socio-educational model. New York, NY: Peter Lang.

18.

Giles

Byrne

J. L.

(1982). An intergroup approach to second language acquisition. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 3, 17-40.

19.

Gómez

García

J. A.

Molina

(2013). Imagen cognitiva de los destinos de interior desde la perspectiva de residentes y visitantes: Una aplicación empírica en cuatro regiones españolas [The cognitive image in the interior destinations from the perspective of residents and visitors: An empirical application in 4 Spanish regions]. Cuadernos de Economía y Dirección de la Empresa, 16, 167-179.

20.

Hanassab

Tidwel

(2002). International students in higher education: Identification of needs and implications for policy and practice. Journal of Studies in International Education, 6, 305-322.

21.

Huntley

(1993). Adult international students: Problems of adjustment (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED355886). Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED355886.pdf

22.

Johnson

D. M.

Kachru

(1994). Sources of bias in SLA: Research monolingual bias in SLA research. TESOL Quarterly, 28, 795-800.

23.

Laine

(1977). Foreign language learning motivation in Finland I. Turku, Finland: Turku University Press.

24.

(2007). Home environment and second language acquisition: The importance of family capital. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 28, 285-299.

25.

Liu

(1998). Ethnocentrism in TESOL: Teacher education and the neglected needs of international TESOL students. ELT Journal, 52, 3-10.

26.

Muchnick

A. G.

Wolfe

D. E.

(1982). Attitudes and motivations of American students of Spanish. Canadian Modern Language Review, 88, 254-261.

27.

Pan

C. C.

Tao

C. H.

Lee

C. Y.

Wang

Cornell

R. A.

H. Y.

(2001). East-meets West times 2: Impact of cultural change at two universities on Asian students. Paper presented at the Annual Conference of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology, Atlanta, GA.

28.

Sridhar

S. N.

(1994). A reality check for SLA theories. TESOL Quarterly, 28, 800-805.

29.

Warden

C. A.

Lin

H. J.

(2000). Existence of integrative motivation in an Asian EFL setting. Foreign Language Annals, 33, 535-547.