Individual differences in the development of the oral fluency of american learners of spanish studying abroad

Resumen

This doctoral dissertation examines the effects of a short stay abroad (SA) experience on second language (L2) oral fluency development, taking into consideration individual differences in cognition and the study abroad experience. Relatively little attention has been paid to the cognitive aspects that influence L2 oral fluency gains. Following Segalowitz’s (2010) model, which emphasizes the underlying cognitive processes that affect L2 speech development, the present study investigates both utterance and cognitive fluency, specifically looking at the relationship between inhibitory control (an under-researched aspect of L2 cognition in the SA context) on L2 fluency gains. Forty-nine American students studying Spanish abroad in Barcelona were tested. First, this study investigates whether L2 oral fluency improves over a short stay abroad period, using an in-depth battery of L2 oral fluency measures. Second, we examine the relationship between L2 oral fluency gains and inhibitory control in the SA context, as we hypothesized that greater inhibitory control ability was related to L2 oral fluency gains. Third, we assess the extent to which individual differences in SA experience factors (such as the amount of self-reported language use, living situation and hours of language classes taken) affect L2 oral fluency gains over the SA period. Picture based speech elicitation tasks were used to collect both L1 and L2 oral fluency data, and L2 oral fluency results were adjusted for the L1 where possible. To measure inhibitory control, both non-linguistic and linguistic inhibitory control tasks were used: a Simon task, a Letter (Phoneme) Decision task, and an L1-L2 and L2-L1 language switching task. Participants also completed a post-test questionnaire about their study abroad language use and experience. Results showed little improvement in L2 speed, breakdown, and repair fluency development after a stay abroad. Participants spoke for a longer duration and had longer fluent runs. Contrary to our predictions, after adjusting for the L1, speed fluency data showed that participants spoke significantly slower at the end of their stay, while breakdown fluency results indicate that participants exhibited more silent and filled pauses at the end of their day, only becoming significantly less disfluent on one breakdown fluency measure (between clause silent pauses). A composite disfluency measure showed participants, on average, were less fluent in their L2 at post-test. Inhibitory control ability was not found to relate to L2 oral fluency gains for most measures. A decrease in one disfluency measure –filled pauses between speech units (ASUs) – was significantly related to performance on the Letter (Phoneme) Decision test. Interestingly, participants were able to switch significantly faster into Spanish at the end of their stay than the beginning, which may be one indicator of increased inhibitory control. Most fluency gains were not related to self-reported language use or other experience factors. Only 4 (of 29) fluency measures were significantly related to self-reported language use, one measure was significantly related to classroom instruction hours, and one was significantly related to living situation. The results imply that these specific experiential factors themselves do not have a large impact on participants’ L2 oral fluency gains while abroad, although questionnaire data indicates participants perceived these factors to greatly affect their L2 oral fluency development. Taken together, our findings suggest that a study abroad experience does not necessarily lead to L2 oral fluency gains. Measuring frequency and duration in L2 oral fluency measures and adjusting for the L1 brings insight to the data. Experience factors do not relate to L2 oral fluency gains, contrary to participant expectations and beliefs. Findings from the present study could be applied to pedagogy in the development of future SA programs.