Test-taker characteristics (TTCs), or individual difference variables, are known to be a systematic source of variance in language test performance. Although previous research has documented the impact of a range of TTCs on second language (L2) learners’ test performance, few of these studies have involved young learners. Given that young L2 learners undergo rapid maturational changes in their cognitive abilities, are susceptible to affective factors in unique ways, and have little autonomy with respect to the context of L2 acquisition, the relationship between their personal attributes and their test performance merit separate research attention. To fill this gap, we investigated the extent to which sixth-grade, Korean-L1, EFL learners’ (n = 107) TTCs predicted their performance on tests of L2 listening and reading comprehension. The TTCs under investigation included three cognitive characteristics (aptitude, phonological working memory, L1 competence), one affective factor (motivation), and two demographic variables (socioeconomic status and gender). Results showed that aptitude and phonological working memory significantly predicted participants’ performance on both L2 listening and reading comprehension tests, whereas motivation predicted performance on the L2 listening comprehension test only. These findings suggest that higher aptitude, phonological working memory, and motivation contribute positively to young learners’ L2 outcomes.
AbrahamssonN.HyltenstamK. (2008). The robustness of aptitude effects in near-native second language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 30(4), 481–509. https://doi.org/10.1017/S027226310808073X
2.
ArabskiJ.WojtaszekA. (Eds.). (2011). Individual learner differences in SLA. Multilingual Matters.
3.
BachmanL. F. (1990). Fundamental considerations in language testing. Oxford University Press.
4.
BachmanL. F. (1991). What does language testing have to offer?TESOL Quarterly, 25(4), 671–704. https://doi.org/10.2307/3587082
BaddeleyA.GathercoleS.PapagnoC. (1998). The phonological loop as a language learning device. Psychological Review, 105(1), 158–173. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.105.1.158
7.
BaddeleyA. D.HitchG. (1974). Working memory. In BowerG. A. (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 8) (pp. 47–90). Academic Press.
8.
BealC. (1994). Boys and girls: The development of gender roles. McGraw-Hill.
9.
BrownR.WaringR.DonkaewbuaS. (2008). Incidental vocabulary acquisition from reading, reading-while-listening, and listening to stories. Reading in a Foreign Language, 20(2), 136–163. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ815119.pdf
ButlerY. G.LeV.-N. (2018). A longitudinal investigation of parental social-economic status (SES) and young students’ learning of English as a foreign language. System, 73, 4–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2017.07.005
12.
CarrollJ. B. (1962). The prediction of success in intensive foreign language training. In GlaserR. (Ed.), Training research and education (pp. 87–136). University of Pittsburgh Press.
13.
CarrollJ. B. (1973). Implications of aptitude test research and psycholinguistic theory for foreign language teaching. International Journal of Psycholinguistics, 2, 5–14. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED057071.pdf
14.
CarrollJ. B.SaponS. M. (1959). Modern language aptitude test. Psychological Corporation.
15.
CarrollJ. B.SaponS. M. (2002). Modern language aptitude test – elementary: MLAT–E. Second Language Testing Foundation.
ColemanJ. S. (1966). Equality of Educational Opportunity (COLEMAN) Study (EEOS). Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor]. https://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR06389.v3
18.
CowanN. (2016). Working memory maturation: Can we get at the essence of cognitive growth?Perspectives on Psychological Science, 11(2), 239–264. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691615621279
19.
CumminsJ. (1979). Linguistic interdependence and the educational development of bilingual children. Review of Educational Research, 49(2), 222–251. https://doi.org/10.2307/1169960
20.
DaneshJ.ShahnaazariM. (2020). A structural relationship model for resilience, L2 learning motivation, and L2 proficiency at different proficiency levels. Learning and Motivation, 72, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lmot.2020.101636
21.
DeciE. L.RyanR. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. Plenum Press.
22.
DeKeyserR. M. (2000). The robustness of critical period effects in second language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 22(4), 499–533. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263100004022
DjigunovićJ. M.NikolovM. (2019). Motivation of young learners of foreign languages. In LambM.CsizérK.HenryA.RyanS. (Eds.), The Palgrave handbook of motivation for language learning (pp. 515–533). Springer International. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-28380-3_25
25.
DörnyeiZ. (2009). The L2 motivational self system. In DornyeiZ.UshiodaE. (Eds.), Motivation, language identity and the L2 self (pp. 9–42). Multilingual Matters.
26.
EllisR. (2004). Individual differences in second language learning. In DaviesA.ElderC. (Eds.), The handbook of applied linguistics (pp. 525–551). Blackwell.
27.
ErdosC.GeneseeF.SavageR.HaighC. A. (2010). Individual differences in second language reading outcomes. International Journal of Bilingualism, 15(1), 3–25. https://doi.org/10.1177/1367006910371022
28.
FarhadyH. (1982). Measures of language proficiency from the learner’s perspective. TESOL Quarterly, 16(1), 43–59. https://doi.org/10.2307/3586562
29.
FenyvesiK. (2020). English learning motivation of young learners in Danish primary schools. Language Teaching Research, 24(5), 690–713. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168818804835
30.
FenyvesiK.HansenM. B.CadiernoT. (2020). The role of individual differences in younger vs. older primary school learners of English in Denmark. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 58(3), 289–322. https://doi.org/10.1515/iral-2017-0053
Garon-CarrierG.BoivinM.GuayF.KovasY.DionneG.LemelinJ.-P.SéguinJ. R.VitaroF.TremblayR. E. (2016). Intrinsic motivation and achievement in mathematics in elementary school: A longitudinal investigation of their association. Child Development, 87(1), 165–175. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12458
33.
GevaE.FarniaF. (2012). Developmental changes in the nature of language proficiency and reading fluency paint a more complex view of reading comprehension in ELL and EL1. Reading and Writing, 25, 1819–1845. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-011-9333-8
34.
GhahariS.AhmadinejadS. (2016). Operationalization of Bachman’s model via a multimodal reading comprehension test: Screening test method facets and testees’ characteristics. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 51, 67–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2016.09.005
35.
GranenaG. (2019). Cognitive aptitudes and L2 speaking proficiency: Links between LLAMA and Hi-LAB. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 41(2), 313–336. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263118000256
36.
GranenaG.YilmazY. (2019). Language aptitude profiles and the effectiveness of implicit and explicit corrective feedback. In LeowR. P. (Ed.), The Routledge handbook of second language research in classroom learning (pp. 440–453). Routledge.
37.
GuayF.ChanalJ.RatelleC. F.MarshH. W.LaroseS.BoivinM. (2010). Intrinsic, identified, and controlled types of motivation for school subjects in young elementary school children. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 80(4), 711–735. https://doi.org/10.1348/000709910X499084
HasselgreenA.CaudwellG. (2016). Assessing the language of young learners. Equinox.
40.
HoxJ. J. (2010). Multilevel analysis: Techniques and applications (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum.
41.
HuangH.-T. D.HungS.-T. A.HongH.-T. V. (2016). Test-taker characteristics and integrated speaking test performance: A path-analytic study. Language Assessment Quarterly, 13(4), 283–301. https://doi.org/10.1080/15434303.2016.1236111
42.
HulstijnJ. H. (2011). Language proficiency in native and nonnative speakers: An agenda for research and suggestions for second-language assessment. Language Assessment Quarterly, 8(3), 229–249. https://doi.org/10.1080/15434303.2011.565844
43.
JaekelN.SchurigM.FlorianM.RitterM. (2017). From early starters to late finishers? A longitudinal study of early foreign language learning in school. Language Learning, 67(3), 631–664. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12242
44.
Kahn-HorwitzJ.SparksR. L.GoldsteinZ. (2012). English as a foreign language spelling development: A longitudinal study. Applied Psycholinguistics, 33(2), 343–363. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0142716411000397
45.
KimT.-Y.KimY.-K. (2014). A structural model for perceptual learning styles, the ideal L2 self, motivated behavior, and English proficiency. System, 46, 14–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2014.07.007
46.
KissC.NikolovM. (2005). Developing, piloting, and validating an instrument to measure young learners’ aptitude. Language Learning, 55(1), 99–150. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0023-8333.2005.00291.x
KlineR. B. (2011). Methodology in the social sciences. Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (3rd ed.). Guilford Press.
49.
KormosJ.BrunfautT.MichelM. (2020). Motivational factors in computer-administered integrated skills tasks: A study of young learners, Language Assessment Quarterly, 17(1), 43–59. https://doi.org/10.1080/15434303.2019.1664551
50.
KormosJ.CsizérK. (2008). Age-related differences in the motivation of learning English as a foreign language: Attitudes, selves, and motivated learning behavior. Language Learning, 58(2), 327–355. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2008.00443.x
51.
KormosJ.SáfárA. (2008). Phonological short-term memory, working memory and foreign language performance in intensive language learning. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 11(2), 261–271. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728908003416
LasagabasterD. (2010). English achievement and student motivation in CLIL and EFL settings. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 5(1), 3–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/17501229.2010.519030
54.
LiS. (2016). The construct validity of language aptitude: A meta-analysis. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 38(4), 801–842. https://doi.org/10.1017/S027226311500042X
55.
LietzP. (2006). A meta-analysis of gender differences in reading achievement at the secondary school level. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 32(4), 317–344. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2006.10.002
56.
LimY. (2018). The widening achievement gap in Korea [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Seoul National University, South Korea.
57.
LinckJ. A.HughesM. M.CampbellS. G.SilbertN. H.TareM.JacksonS. R.SmithB. K.BuntingM. F.DoughtyC. J. (2013). Hi-LAB: A new measure of aptitude for high-level language proficiency. Language Learning, 63(3), 530–566. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12011
58.
LiuJ.PengP.LuoL. (2020). The relation between family socioeconomic status and academic achievement in China: A meta-analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 32, 49–76. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-019-09494-0
59.
ŁockiewiczM.Sarzała-PrzybylskaZ.LipowskaM. (2018). Early predictors of learning a foreign language in pre-school – Polish as a first language, English as a foreign language. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01813
60.
LunaB.GarverK. E.UrbanT. A.LazarN. A.SweeneyJ. A. (2004). Maturation of cognitive processes from late childhood to adulthood. Child Development, 75(5), 1357–1372. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2004.00745.x
61.
MacGinitieW.MacGinitieR.MariaK.DreyerL. G. (2000). Gates–MacGinitie reading test (4th ed.). Riverside.
MasgoretA.-M.GardnerR. C. (2003). Attitudes, motivation, and second language learning: A meta-analysis of studies conducted by Gardner and associates. Language Learning, 53(1), 167–210. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9922.00227
64.
MessickS. (1995). Validity of psychological assessment: Validation of inferences from persons’ responses and performances as scientific inquiry into score meaning. American Psychologist, 50(9), 741–749. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.50.9.741
65.
MichelM.KormosJ.BrunfautT.RatajczakM. (2019). The role of working memory in young second language learners’ written performances. Journal of Second Language Writing, 45, 31–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2019.03.002
66.
MuñozC. (2014). The association between aptitude components and language skills in young learners. In PawlakM.AroninL. (Eds.), Essential topics in applied linguistics and multilingualism (pp. 51–68). Springer International. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-01414-2_4
67.
MuthénB. O.SatorraA. (1989). Multilevel aspects of varying parameters in structural models. In BockR. D. (Ed.), Multilevel analysis of educational data (pp. 87–99). Academic Press.
68.
MuscaS. C.KamiejskiR.NugierA.MéotA.Er-RafiyA.BrauerM. (2011). Data with hierarchical structure: Impact of intraclass correlation and sample size on type-I error. Frontiers in Psychology, 2, 1–6. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00074
69.
NunnallyJ. C. (1978). Psychometric theory. McGraw-Hill.
Oga-BaldwinW. L. Q.NakataY.ParkerP.RyanR. M. (2017). Motivating young language learners: A longitudinal model of self-determined motivation in elementary school foreign language classes. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 49, 140–150. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2017.01.010
73.
O’SullivanB.GreenA. (2011). Test taker characteristics. In TaylorL. (Ed.), Examining speaking: Research and practice in assessing second language speaking (pp. 36–64). UCLES/Cambridge University Press.
PawlakM. (Ed.). (2012). New perspectives on individual differences in language learning and teaching. Springer.
76.
PetersE.NoreillieA.-S.HeylenK.BultéB.DesmetP. (2019). The impact of instruction and out-of-school exposure to foreign language input on learners’ vocabulary knowledge in two languages. Language Learning, 69(3), 747–782. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12351
77.
PurpuraJ. E. (2004). Validating questionnaires to examine personal factors in L2 test performance. In MilanovichM.WeirC. (Eds.), European language testing in a global context (pp. 93–115). Cambridge University Press.
78.
RaudenbushS. W.BrykA. S. (2002). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods (2nd ed.). SAGE.
79.
ReardonS. F. (2011). The widening academic achievement gap between the rich and the poor: New evidence and possible explanations. In DuncanG. J.MurnaneR. J. (Eds.), Whither opportunity? Rising inequality, schools, and children’s life chances (pp. 91–115). Russell Sage Foundation.
Roehr-BrackinK.TellierA. (2019). The role of language-analytic ability in children’s instructed second language learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 41(5), 1111–1131. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263119000214
82.
SemelE.WiigE. H.SecordW. A. (2003). CELF examiner’s manual (4th ed.). The Psychological Corporation.
83.
SirinS. (2005). Socioeconomic status and academic achievement: A meta-analytic review of research. Review of Education Research, 75(3), 417–453. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543075003417
SkehanP.DucroquetL. (1988). A comparison of first and foreign language ability. Working Documents No. 8, ESOL Department, Institute of Education, London University.
SparksR. L.GanschowL. (1991). Foreign language learning differences: Affective or native language aptitude differences?Modern Language Journal, 75(1), 3–16. https://doi.org/10.2307/329830
88.
SparksR. L.PattonJ.GanschowL.HumbachN.JavorskyJ. (2006). Native language predictors of foreign language proficiency and foreign language aptitude. Annals of Dyslexia, 56(1), 129–160. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11881-006-0006-2
89.
StataCorp. (2019). Stata statistical software: Release 16. StataCorp.
90.
SunH.SteinkraussR.TendeiroJ.De BotK. (2015). Individual differences in very young children’s English acquisition in China: Internal and external factors. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition,19(3), 550–577. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728915000243
91.
van der SlikF. W. P.van HoutR. W. N. M.SchepensJ. J. (2015). The gender gap in second language acquisition: Gender differences in the acquisition of Dutch among immigrants from 88 countries with 49 mother tongues. PLoS ONE, 10(11), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0142056
92.
VandergriftL.BakerS. (2015). Learner variables in second language listening comprehension: An exploratory path analysis. Language Learning, 65(2), 390–416. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12105
93.
VulchanovaM.FoynC. H.NilsenR. A.SigmundssonH. (2014). Links between phonological memory, first language competence and second language competence in 10-year-old children. Learning and Individual Differences, 35, 87–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2014.07.016
94.
WechslerD. (2009). Weschler individual achievement test (3rd ed.). Psychological Corporation.
95.
WinkeP.BrunfautT. (2021). Perspectives on ‘knowing’ a second language: What are we seeking to measure? In WinkeP.BrunfautT. (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of second language acquisition and language testing (pp. 1–8). Routledge.
96.
WolfM. K.ButlerY. G. (2017). An overview of English language proficiency assessments for young learners. In WolfM. K.ButlerY. G. (Eds.), English language proficiency assessments for young learners (pp. 3–21). Routledge.
97.
WuchererB. V.ReitererS. M. (2016). Language is a girlie thing, isn’t it? A psycholinguistic exploration of the L2 gender gap. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 21(1), 118–134. https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2016.1142499
98.
YeungS. S.ChanC. K. K. (2013). Phonological awareness and oral language proficiency in learning to read English among Chinese kindergarten children in Hong Kong. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 83, 550–568. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8279.2012.02082.x
99.
YilmazY.GranenaG. (2016). The role of cognitive aptitudes for explicit language learning in the relative effects of explicit and implicit feedback. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 19(1), 147–161. https://doi.org/10.1017/S136672891400090X
100.
ZeidnerM. (1986). Are English language aptitude tests biased towards culturally different minority groups? Some Israeli findings:Language Testing, 3(1), 80–98. https://doi.org/10.1177/026553228600300104
101.
ZhangY.LinC.-H.ZhangD.ChoiY. (2017). Motivation, strategy, and English as a foreign language vocabulary learning: A structural equation modelling study. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 87(1), 57–74. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjep.12135
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
