El Rol de La Autoestima en El Aprendizaje de Idiomas

Second Language Learning and Teaching
Agnieszka Habrat
The Role of
Self-Esteem in
Foreign Language
Learning and
Teaching
Series editor
Mirosław Pawlak, Kalisz, Poland
The series brings together volumes dealing with different aspects of learning and
teaching second and foreign languages. The titles included are both monographs
and edited collections focusing on a variety of topics ranging from the processes
underlying second language acquisition, through various aspects of language
learning in instructed and non-instructed settings, to different facets of the teaching
process, including syllabus choice, materials design, classroom practices and
evaluation. The publications reflect state-of-the-art developments in those areas,
they adopt a wide range of theoretical perspectives and follow diverse research
paradigms. The intended audience are all those who are interested in naturalistic
and classroom second language acquisition, including researchers, methodologists,
curriculum and materials designers, teachers and undergraduate and graduate
students undertaking empirical investigations of how second languages are learnt
and taught.
More information about this series at http://www.springer.com/series/10129

Agnieszka Habrat
The Role of Self-Esteem

in Foreign Language
Learning and Teaching
123
Agnieszka Habrat
Zakład Filologii Angielskiej
Państwowa Wyższa Szkoła Zawodowa im.
Stanisława Pigonia w Krośnie
Krosno, Podkarpackie
Poland
ISSN 2193-7648 ISSN 2193-7656 (electronic)

ISBN 978-3-319-75282-2 ISBN 978-3-319-75283-9 (eBook)
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-75283-9
Library of Congress Control Number: 2018931432
© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

This work is subject to copyright. All rights are reserved by the Publisher, whether the whole or part
of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations,
recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission
or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar
methodology now known or hereafter developed.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this
publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from
the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.
The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this
book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the
authors or the editors give a warranty, express or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or
for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to
jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Printed on acid-free paper
This Springer imprint is published by the registered company Springer International Publishing
AG part of Springer Nature
The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland
Contents
1 Psychological and Pedagogical Background of Self-esteem . . . . . . .. 1

1.1 Cognition and Affect as Inextricable Components of Learning . .. 2
1.2 The Importance of the Affective Domain in General Functioning,
Education and Second Language Acquisition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1.2.1 Psychological Functioning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1.2.2 Education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1.2.3 Second Language Acquisition (SLA) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
1.3 Self and Self-related Concepts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
1.3.1 Self-esteem from the Historical Perspective . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
1.3.2 The Typology of Self-esteem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
1.3.3 Other Typologies of Self-esteem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
1.3.4 The Antecedents of Self-esteem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
1.3.5 Other Self-related Constructs: Self-concept
and Self-efficacy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
1.4 Self-esteem Development Across the Life Span . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
1.4.1 Childhood . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
1.4.2 Adolescence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
1.4.3 Adulthood . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
1.4.4 Old Age . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
1.5 Self-esteem and Gender . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
1.6 Self-esteem and Culture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
1.6.1 The Individualist and Collectivist Cultural Context . . . . . . 31
1.6.2 Meritocratic and Ego-Protective Educational Culture . . . . . 33
1.6.3 The Position of Poland Along the Individualist-
Collectivist Continuum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
1.6.4 Global and Ethnic Self-esteem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
1.7 The Role of Self-esteem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
1.7.1 Self-esteem and Psychological Functioning . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
v
vi Contents
1.8 Self-esteem and Learning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38

1.9 Self-esteem and Language Learning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
2 A Review of Selected Empirical Research on Self-esteem . . . . . . . . . 47
2.1 Assessing Self-esteem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
2.2 Methodological Diversity in Self-esteem Studies . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
2.2.1 The Most Popular Measures of Self-esteem . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
2.2.2 The Issue of Validity in Researching Self-esteem
Revisited . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
2.3 The Role of Self-esteem in Psychological Functioning . . . . . . . . . 55
2.3.1 Participation in Social Groups and Likeability . . . . . . . . . . 55
2.3.2 Conformity and Leadership . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
2.3.3 Creativity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
2.3.4 Antisocial Behaviour . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
2.4 Self-esteem and Learning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
2.5 Self-esteem and Learning a Foreign Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
2.5.1 Self-esteem and Performance in FL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
3 Research Methodology and Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77
3.1 Rationale for the Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77
3.2 Method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83
3.2.1 Participants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83
3.2.2 Instruments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87
3.2.3 Procedure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90
3.2.4 Analyses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91
3.3 Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92
3.3.1 Quantitative Findings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92
3.3.2 Qualitative Findings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107
3.4 Limitations of the Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111
4 Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115
4.1 Foreign Language Self-esteem and the Level of Proficiency . . . . . 115
4.2 Correlates and Predictors of Foreign Language Self-esteem . . . . . . 120
4.2.1 Demography-Related Correlates of Foreign Language
Self-esteem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121
4.2.2 Educational Correlates of Foreign Language
Self-esteem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124
4.2.3 Personal Correlates and Predictors of FLSE . . . . . . . . . . . 126
4.3 Students with High and Low FLSE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132
4.3.1 The Characteristics of Students with High FLSE . . . . . . . . 132
4.3.2 The Characteristics of Students with Low FLSE . . . . . . . . 135
Contents vii
5 Conclusions and Implications for the EFL Classroom . . . . . . . . . . . 141

5.1 The Purpose of the Book . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 141
5.2 Recommendations for Further Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 144
5.3 Implications for the EFL Classrooms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 147
Appendix A . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153
Appendix B . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 159
List of Figures
Fig. 1.1 Self-concept model based on Shavelson, Hubner,

and Stanton’s model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 22
Fig. 1.2 The model of self-concept . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 25
Fig. 1.3 The relation between self-esteem, self-concept
and self-efficacy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 27
Fig. 2.1 The traditional methodological pyramid
of self-esteem research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 50
Fig. 3.1 FLSE and the length of exposure for N = 381
(linear correlation) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 93
Fig. 3.2 Group FLSE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 95
Fig. 3.3 The relationship between FLSE and aggregated
assessment of skills . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 97
Fig. 3.4 FLSE means and ranges in relation to the place
of residence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101
Fig. 3.5 FLSE means and ranges in relation to the knowledge
of English by close relatives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103
Fig. 3.6 FLSE levels of participants who disliked (1), N = 71/liked (2),
N = 310 the teacher . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103
Fig. 3.7 FLSE of students with and without extracurricular
FL activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104
ix
List of Tables
Table 1.1 The major contributors to the development of the construct

self-esteem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 9
Table 2.1 Summary of the selected research on the
relationship between self-esteem and psychological
functioning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 60
Table 2.2 Summary of the selected research on the relationship
between self-esteem and learning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 64
Table 2.3 Summary of the selected research on language-specific
self-esteem and language learning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 68
Table 2.4 Review of the selected research into the linkage between
self-esteem in multidimensional perspective and various
aspects of foreign language learning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 73
Table 3.1 Demographic characteristics of the sample
(N = 381) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 84
Table 3.2 FLSE values in all groups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 93
Table 3.3 The correlations between FLSE and length of exposure
for each group . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 94
Table 3.4 The between-group comparison of FLSE at different
educational levels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 95
Table 3.5 The between-group comparison of FLSE in extended and
non-extended groups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 96
Table 3.6 Self-assessment of four macro skills (N = 381) . . . . . . . . . . .. 98
Table 3.7 Correlations of FLSE and FL achievement in four macro
skills for the whole sample . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 98
Table 3.8 The final marks obtained in the previous class/year
(N = 381) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 99
Table 3.9 The proportions of female and male students in the
whole sample . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 99
Table 3.10 Female and male FLSE values in the whole sample . . . . . . .. 99
Table 3.11 FLSE and the place of residence in the
whole sample . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100
xi
xii List of Tables
Table 3.12 FLSE and English-speaking relatives

in the whole sample . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102
Table 3.13 The proportions of students who liked and disliked their FL
teachers in the whole sample . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102
Table 3.14 Means, medians and standard deviations of FLSE in groups
liking or disliking their teacher in the whole sample . . . . . . . . 102
Table 3.15 FLSE of students who have/do not have extracurricular FL
activities in the whole sample . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104
Table 3.16 The descriptive statistics of the L2-related personal factors
(N = 381) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105
Table 3.17 The summary of correlations between FLSE and selected L2
learning-related variables in the whole sample . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105
Table 3.18 FLSE and L2-related variables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106
Introduction
Any class of learners, regardless of the stage of education, type of school and its
location (in a metropolitan or rural area), comprises an amazing variety of indi-
viduals who are distinct in the name, height, weight, possibly in ethnic background,
etc. What bears particular relevance to an instructor, though, is the fact that each
of the students displays special talents, aptitudes or attitudes that account for the
more or less rapid progress, or, in some cases, lack of progress and serious learning
difficulties. There will be students who are keen to work, who stay in good rela-
tionships with the teacher and classmates, and others, who are easily demotivated,
withdrawn and remain a matter of constant concern for the teacher.
The theory and practice of English language teaching has come a long way from
the days when success or failure in learning was attributed solely to cognitive
processes. The recent years have seen a growing appreciation of the role of affective
factors that determine how the learner feels about the subject, the learning activities
and themselves. These feelings translate into the sense of agency, motivation and
commitment on the learner’s part. The acknowledgement of the role of the emo-
tional aspects of learning has become part of the foundations of applied linguistics.
Compared to other areas of study, language learning is far more ego-involving,
which means that it vastly engages the emotional sphere, whose crucial constituents
are the learner’s unique self-beliefs. These beliefs account for how the learner views
their past experience, their current performance and their future goals. The book is
concerned with the role of foreign language self-esteem in learning as a facet of
self-beliefs that exerts a notable influence on learner attitudes and behaviours. The
construct refers to the learner self-perception in the domain of language learning,
i.e. how they feel about themselves in both cognitive and affective terms. Despite its
asserted importance, many questions about the impact of foreign language
self-esteem on learner attainment have not been thoroughly answered yet. It is
believed by the author that by integrating elements of linguistic and psychological
exploration, the current research will attend to the characteristics of the construct, its
dynamics and its interplay with other factors.
Given the absence of studies examining foreign language self-esteem in
a developmental perspective, the current research embraces an investigation of
xiii
xiv Introduction
a sample that represents three stages of education—from lower secondary to ter-

tiary, distinguishing further between varied proficiency levels and demographic
characteristics of the participants. The insight into the developmental dynamics,
major correlates and predictors of foreign language self-esteem may enable to
transform the findings into practical pedagogical advice applicable in foreign lan-
guage classrooms, catering for ego-protecting, learner-friendly atmosphere.
The study is divided into a theoretical and practical part, further subdivided into
chapters, each of them concluded with a résumé of the main points. The first chapter
begins with a brief reminder of the inseparability and reciprocity of cognitive and
affective domains in learning, followed by an outline of the major constituent
processes belonging to each of the domains. The next section addresses the question
of ‘what is self-esteem’ and explicates the definitional concerns in distinguishing
between the main self-related concepts. The major theoretical models of the core
construct are reviewed, departing from the historical perspective towards devel-
oping its working definition for the purposes of the volume. The chapter also
describes the structure of self-esteem, followed by its most prominent typologies. In
view of the subsequent parts, the section which presents the multidimensional and
multifaceted nature of self-esteem seems crucial as it depicts the position of foreign
language self-esteem in the hierarchy of self-views. The next parts explain the
sources of high or low self-esteem, its dependence on cultural background and its
development across lifespan (with special emphasis on adolescence and the onset of
adulthood) as well as its influence on psychological functioning, as it is viewed by
modern psychology. A broad theoretical background to the construct having been
introduced, the analysis of its relevance to learning follows. Self-esteem is then
situated in SLA context, and its relation to other important constructs in the domain
of FL learning is considered. It is also discussed why self-esteem bears importance
for attainment in FL learning.
The aim of Chap. 2 is to present a review of empirical research on self-esteem in
its various dimensions. It opens with an overview of designs, methods and
instruments that have been developed by other researchers and a discussion of
challenges and pitfalls in measuring self-esteem that researchers need to be aware
of. There follows an inventory of researches into the impact of self-esteem on a
range of aspects of psychological functioning, selected on the basis of their rele-
vance to educational context. The chapter continues by outlining the findings of
studies into the interaction between self-esteem and learning, and it contains a
separate section on the interplay between the focal construct in a multidimensional
perspective and some important aspects of FL learning. The chapter ends with
considerations of correlates of foreign language self-esteem scrutinized in reference
to different age groups, educational settings and proficiency levels. The part also
pertains to skill-specific correlates of self-esteem. Each section closes with a
summary of findings that partly informed the research design used in this study.
Chapter 3 opens the empirical part, and its initial paragraphs present the general
aim of the research conducted for the purposes of the study. The rationale for the
Introduction xv
current study encompasses three major goals. The first one is to observe
the dynamics of foreign language self-esteem across three stages of education in the
Polish system, and between varied levels of proficiency. The second one is to
examine selected correlates and predictors of the central construct, and the third one
is to present a profile of a high and low self-esteem learner, enhancing the symp-
toms of either of the types of experience and its possible antecedents. The next parts
contain detailed descriptions of the method adopted, specifications of instruments,
procedures and analyses, as well as an account of the sample and research design.
The remaining sections contain a thorough report of the results obtained in the
quantitative and qualitative research. The chapter is concluded with a summary of
findings and the specification of limitations of the study.
Chapter 4 is devoted to the discussion of the results. It commences with the analysis
of changes that foreign language self-esteem is subject to according to changing
proficiency (operationalized for the purposes of the book as the growing length of
exposure, intensity of instruction or achievement in L2). The middle part features
considerations on some important correlates and predictors of L2 self-esteem, divided
into demographic or educational. The final section is an analysis of characteristics of
students who hold either high or low foreign language self-esteem.
The final chapter recapitulates the main aims pursued by the book and its main
hypotheses. It strives to propose a comprehensive framework for understanding
foreign language self-esteem against the Polish secondary and tertiary educational
background. There is also an outline of directions for further studies into the
construct with proposals of alternative research designs, sample or instrument
selections. Further, the chapter contains an extensive set of implications for FL
teaching practices, all of which could engender class atmosphere conducive to
developing an optimal level of foreign language self-esteem.
In conclusion, as the author of the book, I strongly hope that the findings of my
research reflect some aspects of the complex and manifold reality that every teacher
faces in a classroom and that it will increase the sensitivity of educationalists to the
immense diversity of self-related issues that learners of all ages bring with them to
lessons. For both practitioners and academics, I hope it might be a humble inspi-
ration for future work towards optimization of ELT methodologies from the global
and local point of view. It needs to be admitted that the work on the research has
given me invaluable opportunities to enrich the understanding of the affective
domain and discover some fascinating mechanisms or relationships that may amplify
or invalidate the outcomes of the efforts of the learner, their teachers, course book
writers, syllabus designers, etc. The insights gained in the process of writing the
book have intimidated me with the immense complexity of the domain, impossible
to embrace by the research, but at the same time they have helped me to develop new
sensitivity to foreign language learner differences and their diverse needs.
Chapter 1
Psychological and Pedagogical
Background of Self-esteem
Self-esteem is a well-researched psychological construct, found to be critical to

success or failure in many spheres of life. Its role in education has been widely
discussed but it has escaped unequivocal explanations. The book aims at proving
that self-esteem is one of the factors that attainment in language learning must be
conceived in terms of. The aim of the present chapter is to provide a broader
theoretical background to the concept, so that the role of learner self-esteem in
language acquisition can be analyzed in its further parts. The initial section contains
an explanation of the role of affect and cognition in learning and the specification of
affective factors relevant to the process. It is followed by an overview of the most
widely applied definitions of self-esteem and an attempt at formulating its working
definition for the purposes of the volume. The chapter also features an explanation
of antecedents and correlates of self-esteem with a special focus on its impact on
human psychological functioning. The subsequent parts clarify selected self-related
concepts and links between them to be followed by an overview of major
typologies of the core construct. Next, the cultural, age and gender considerations
of the concept are depicted. In the final sections, the construct is placed in the
educational context in order to present the linkage between self-esteem and aca-
demic achievement. The chapter concludes with a discussion of self-esteem from
the perspective of the second language acquisition process with an increased focus
on those aspects that are directly or indirectly influenced by a foreign language
learner’s sense of self-worthiness.
© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018 1

A. Habrat, The Role of Self-Esteem in Foreign Language Learning and Teaching,
Second Language Learning and Teaching,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-75283-9_1
2 1 Psychological and Pedagogical Background of Self-esteem
1.1 Cognition and Affect as Inextricable Components

of Learning
Any learning behaviour is underpinned by cognitive processes such as perceiving,

thinking, reasoning, etc. However, there is more to obtaining knowledge than just
reasoning. Cognition and the other pillar of learning, that is affect (represented by
learner’s self-esteem among other factors) may seem to be separate paradigms but,
as a matter of fact, they are complementary elements of human learning. They are
more mutually dependent than mutually exclusive (Maftoon & Sabah, 2012).
Recent research into affect has placed it on the same footing as cognition, which for
long years was seen as a critical aspect of the learning process (Bernat &
Gvozdenko, 2005; Bown & White, 2010; Dewaele, 2005).
The term cognition denotes the processes by which knowledge and under-
standing is developed in the mind—memory, attention, problem solving, planning,
etc. (http://psychology.about.com/od/cindex/). It is responsible for the development
of intellectual skills and achieving intellectual outcomes. Bloom (in Fontana, 1991,
p. 141) identified six categories of concepts or processes that constitute the cog-
nitive domain.
1. Knowledge: the ability to recall facts, terms, theories, etc.
2. Comprehension: understanding the meaning and interpretation of knowledge.
3. Application: the ability to use knowledge and comprehension in novel
situations.
4. Analysis: the ability to separate material into component parts in order to
understand the organizational structure.
5. Synthesis: the ability to reassemble parts into a structure or meaning.
6. Evaluation: the ability to make judgements about the value of materials or ideas
with explicit and coherent criteria.
The cognitive domain underlies an individual’s intelligence, study habits, learning
strategies, language aptitude. Unlike rational cognition, affect refers to the
emotion-ridden sphere of life (Brown in Piasecka, 2013). The term has been used to
refer to a range of constructs, such as personality characteristics, beliefs, motiva-
tion, attitudes, etc. In Psychology affect refers to “the emotional interpretation of
perceptions, information and knowledge (…) and asks the question ‘How do I feel
about this knowledge or information?’” (Huitt in Bown & White, 2010, p. 433).
Affect, along with satisfaction with life, is a predictor of subjective well-being and
global happiness. It contributes to effective psychological functioning (Galinha &
Pais-Ribero, 2008) Emotions, in turn, are the complex reactions of the body to
different stimuli, temporary neural dispositions that are accompanied by physical
symptoms such as dry mouth, pale skin or faster heartbeat (Bosse, Jonker, & Treur,
2008). The affective domain includes five categories.
1. Receiving: willingness to hear information and attend to different stimuli, for
instance situations, people or objects.
1.1 Cognition and Affect as Inextricable Components of Learning 3
2. Responding: active participation of the learner—answering, complying, helping,

etc.
3. Valuing: the ability to attach value to objects, phenomena or behaviours. It
involves attitudes, moral and social judgements (for example acceptance or
commitment).
4. Organization: the ability to bring values together, relate, contrast or modify
them.
5. Characterization: having a value system that controls behaviour and builds a
philosophy of life (Bloom, Kraftwohl, & Masia in Brown, 2007).
The above taxonomies comprise cognitive and affective constituents of successful
learning that have to be acknowledged by anybody responsible for delineating
educational objectives to be met in every course, and, optimally, in every lesson.
According to developmental and neuroscientific theorists, cognitive and affective
processes interact towards effective learning (Liu, Q. F. Fu, & X. L. Fu, 2009). For
example, emotionally significant stimuli capture attention more easily than neutral
stimuli (NB negative ones do it more efficiently than positive ones). The integration
of cognitive and affective operations is accounted for by the observation that some
regions of the brain are involved in controlling both cognitive and affective pro-
cesses, c.f. the amygdala, the hippocampus or the cerebellum (ibid). Another way in
which the affective domain participates in cognitive operations is by interfering
with the performance of memory. Strong emotional stimuli engage memory,
especially its working storage, and, consequently, the capacity for other kinds of
data becomes lower. As Bown and White (2010) claim, negative emotions consume
one’s cognitive resources. Additionally, affect may interfere with one’s ability to
draw on data stored in long-term memory (Arnold, 1999).
It has been proved that the influences between cognitive and affective processes
are mutual. The complex, bi-directional interactions between the systems can be
somewhat simplistically explained in the following way: evaluations, perceptions,
analyses and the other processes representing the cognitive domain may generate
various affective states. Meanwhile emotional factors, like feelings of anger or
happiness, attitudes, beliefs, etc. can have cognitive consequences. They determine
one’s thinking, planning, evaluations, etc. By the same token, they can enhance,
impede or even prevent learning (Dörnyei, 2009). The interrelationship between
cognition and affect is acknowledged in modern educational context but, as stated at
the beginning of the section, for centuries the emotional aspect of learning was
pushed into insignificance. Some reasons for the situation can be easily identified.
Affect is hard to measure in an objective way, the enquiry into it poses a number of
methodological challenges. Besides, the affective component is subjective, elusive
by nature, and may be viewed as vague (Maftoon & Sabah, 2012). Therefore, one of
the main directions in Psychology in the twentieth century, namely behaviourism,
and the more recent trends ignored its role in learning (Rosenberg & Fredrickson in
Dörnyei, 2009).
1.2 The Importance of the Affective Domain in General

Functioning, Education and Second Language
Acquisition
Even though it may not be explicitly stated, affective processes are pervasive in
educational contexts and beyond. It seems worth mentioning that emotional needs
have been put in the widely-recognized Maslowian hierarchy as a bridge between
the basic physiological and security-related levels and those of achievement or
self-realization (McLeod, 2016), which conveys their importance for human
well-being.
1.2.1 Psychological Functioning
Affect permeates multiple life domains. Schiffrin (2014) claims that positive affect
yields developmental advantages, and is related to success in psychological, social,
physical and cognitive areas of life. Happy individuals tend to have more fulfilling
marriages and relationships, higher incomes and better work performance, as well
as enjoy better health and longevity prospects than their less happy counterparts.
They also reveal behaviours generally regarded as desirable—confidence, opti-
mism, effective coping with stress, energy, sociability, or altruism. The attributes
related to positive affect encourage active involvement with goal pursuits (ap-
proaching rather than avoiding them) and with the environment (Lyubomirsky,
King, & Diener, 2005). Positive affect holders experience frequent positive moods
and there is more chance of working actively towards new goals while experiencing
those moods. Occasional dissatisfactions can drive them towards analytical pro-
cessing and solving the problem or changing their goals and directions. Happy
people may react in a negative manner when frustrated but they regain their positive
state, which is characteristic of emotion regulation (the ability to adaptively manage
negative emotions). Conversely, people prone to negative affect face a higher risk
for emotion dysregulation when they experience adverse events or when they are
placed in chaotic environments (Bradley et al., 2011).
1.2.2 Education
As it was mentioned in Sect. 1.1, affect interferes with cognitive processes vital for
learning. Positive emotions broaden perception attention. People in a positive mood
are able to perceive more peripheral information than those in a negative or neutral
mood. Payne and Schnapp (2014) confirm that negative affective experiences are
responsible for deficits in memory and attention. Preponderance of positive affect
facilitates creative problem solving, decision making and reading comprehension
1.2 The Importance of the Affective Domain in General Functioning … 5
(Lyubomirsky et al., 2005; Rowe, Stewart, & Patterson, 2007). McElwain,

Booth-LaForce, Lansford, Wu, and Dyer (2008) add that happy children with
secure attachments (emotional bonds between children and caregivers) develop
better language skills, academic performance and attain higher point averages.
Affective assessment of different types of stimuli underlies cognition and con-
trols the processes of decision making (Schumann, 1998). A positive assessment of
a stimulus facilitates approaching similar stimuli in the future, while a negative
assessment leads to avoidance. The context of learning is characterized by the same
mechanisms. When a stimulus (for instance a successful oral performance) is
positively appraised, it will positively influence the learner’s desire to devote
attention and effort to future learning. A positive appraisal underlies learner moti-
vation. If a stimulus evokes a negative appraisal, less attention and effort will be
devoted to it in future (Dewaele, 2011). The processes of experiencing the world
and appraising the experiences contribute to the formation of individual preferences
and aversions. The preferences or aversions (called somatic value) depend on
whether the experiences are novel (familiar or unfamiliar), pleasant (attractive),
enhancing goals or needs (necessary for achieving one’s goals or satisfying one’s
needs), compatible with coping mechanisms (whether the person hopes to manage
the experience), and supportive of self-image and social image (whether the
experience matches the person’s self-evaluation and lives up to social expectations
(Garret & Young, 2009). Once formed, the preferences account for liking certain
things and disliking others, and they are different for different persons. It may thus
happen that the same situation is appraised differently by different people.
Therefore, apparently identical learning circumstances such as the content, the
teacher’s style and method, the relevance of the course to personal needs may be
gauged in varied ways and have a varying motivating effect on individual learners.
A phenomenon closely connected with the affective domain in the educational
perspective is the human need for sociostatic regulation, that is the tendency to seek
for facial, vocal and tactile interaction with members of the same species. Every
human being feels a need for attachment and social affiliation (Schumann, 1998).
This drive is also powerful in classroom settings (Dewaele, 2011). Relations with
the teacher and with the classmates have an effect on a learner’s sense of
well-being. A pleasurable classroom atmosphere is likely to stimulate their need to
create and maintain these social affiliations. Conversely, unsupportive atmosphere
may be perceived by a learner as threatening, and may lead to withdrawal
(Schumann, 1998). As implied before, affective experience is conducive to cog-
nitive accomplishment, hence educationalists should recognize the importance of
how learners feel in class in order to optimize their academic achievement.
1.2.3 Second Language Acquisition (SLA)
In the area of SLA it is only in the last decades of the 20th century that the affective
domain was recognized as having some relevance for language learning alongside
cognitive processing. A certain shift in emphasis was triggered by the claims of

humanistic psychology in 1960s. The human being was perceived as a feeling,
thinking individual, possessing a rich sphere of spirituality. The appreciation of the
role of the emotional factor in learning accounted for the emergence of the holistic
approach to language learning, according to which the process means developing
understanding of the world, oneself and others. The knowledge of self means
gaining an insight into mental and emotional processes, and becoming aware of
one’s own needs, potentials and limitations (Araluce, 2002). The novel approach to
language learning experience was reflected in the major English Language
Teaching methods. One of them was Suggestopedia, whose founder, Lozanov,
claimed that learning is effective only when mental barriers and tensions are low-
ered. Other methods that attached importance to the emotional component were:
Gattegno’s Silent Way, Curran’s Community Language Learning and Asher’s Total
Physical Response. According to Krashen, whose Natural Approach flourished in
the 1980s, there is a connection between emotions and cognition in the form of the
Affective Filter, defined as “that part of the internal processing system that sub-
consciously screens the incoming language based on what psychologists call affect,
the learner’s needs, attitudes and emotional states” (Dulay, Burt, & Krashen, 1986,
p. 46). For learning to be effective, the Affective Filter has to be lowered—inhi-
bitions and stress have to be minimized. If the filter is up (negative emotions
accompany learning), input is prevented from being taken in and the acquisition is
blocked. If the filter is down (negative emotions are reduced), the acquisition takes
place. In other words, affect has a say on how information is encoded in the brain
and how it is retrieved (Arnold, 1999; Ni, 2012).
As a practical implementation of affect-sensitive language instruction,
Rinvolucri (in Arnold, 1999) propagated the use of “whole person activities” which
were supposed to enable students to find out some truth about themselves and their
classmates during learning activities. Similarly, Moscowitz (in Araluce, 2002)
postulated teaching through meaningful activities, which are linked with feelings
and experiences of learners. She added that learning achievement greatly depends
on how the learners feel about themselves.
The turn of the 20th and the 21st century saw a surge in attention devoted to the
role of affective variables in learning and teaching processes. A certain conceptual
shift in thinking resulted in agreement among applied linguists that affective
responses are “concomitants of language learning experience” (Bown & White,
2010, p. 432). Language learning is an ongoing interaction between, or an incessant
interplay of cognitive and affective experiences. The latter determine the ways in
which students engage with the learning context. The predominant affective factors
that are relevant to language learning are:
• Anxiety—the feeling of uneasiness, apprehension or worry
• Inhibition—a set of defenses built to protect the ego
• Extroversion–introversion—a need to receive self-esteem, a sense of wholeness
and ego boost from other people or from the reflection of the self
• Motivation—the inner drive to pursue a course of action
1.2 The Importance of the Affective Domain in General Functioning … 7
• Learner styles—a predisposition toward processing information in a specific

way
• Self-esteem—the sense of self-worth (Brown, 1994)
Arnold (1999) put forward an extended typology of affective factors, reaching
beyond the realm of the learner’s inner self, and she divided them into two distinct
categories:
1. connected with the language learner as an individual: anxiety, inhibition,
extroversion-introversion, motivation, learner styles, self-esteem.
2. connected with the learner as a participant in socio-cultural situations:
(a) empathy—trying to understand another person’s thoughts and feelings,
(b) classroom transaction—“the process of reaching beyond the self to others”
(Brown, 1994, p. 143),
(c) cross-cultural processes—understanding what is appropriate or inappropri-
ate in L2 communication.
Affective factors are of vital importance in accounting for individual differences in
second language achievement (Dewaele, 2011; Valdivia, McLoughlin, & Mynard,
2011). As it was stated earlier, they strongly affect the learners’ input and the
proportion of it that is transformed into intake. An example of an affective factor
(that has been most extensively researched in Second Language Acquisition stud-
ies) engaged in the transformation is learning motivation, which is ‘wanting to
learn’. It distinguishes second language acquisition from first language acquisition
and accounts for a significant proportion of willingness, and consequently, success
in language learning (Ushioda & Chen, 2011).
The latest literature on the subject is unanimous in considering L2 learning
experience as conducive to strong emotions (Dewaele, 2011; Pavlenko, 2005;
Piasecka, 2013; Piechurska-Kuciel, 2008). Learners are supposed to convey mes-
sages in a non-native language which they have not mastered sufficiently, which
“seriously inhibits their self-perception of genuineness, (…) and creates potential
sources of negative evaluation by significant others involved in the communication
process” (Piechurska-Kuciel, 2008, p. 57). Besides, they have fears that others may
be more competent and proficient than themselves, and they are bothered about
their place in the group ranking or in the social-pecking order (Dewaele, 2011). All
this may be responsible for a lack of confidence and general and foreign language
anxiety in a learner. The progress of an L2 learner greatly depends on the chemistry
in the classroom and the right kind of emotional climate. It is only natural for a
learner to seek for the sociostatic regulation—the bond of friendship and mutual
respect with the teacher and the classmates (Schumann, 1998). Learners’ beliefs and
emotions play a vital role both in forming social relationships and thinking,
decision-making or undertaking action.
Apart from having to express oneself in a foreign language and thereby expe-
riencing a limited identity or comparing oneself to others, a learner has to deal with
many other aspects of learning that evoke affective responses. Assessment, the
sense of progress that results from it, coping with mistakes, momentary (or con-
stant) confusion may lead to emotional states that need to be thoughtfully con-
trolled. Bown and White (2010) emphasise the need for learner self-regulation,
which is the intelligent processing of emotions in order to mitigate the effects of
negative ones in order to meet particular goals. Overcoming frustration, self-doubt,
managing anxiety, maintaining enthusiasm and generating positive emotions are
highly desirable outcomes to be achieved by the regulation of the self by the self.
A learner who possesses the skills of self-regulation has notably better chances for
experiencing positive emotions such as pride, enjoyment, hope, enthusiasm, etc.
(Piasecka, 2013). Positive emotions have a facilitative effect on learning, while
negative ones consume learners’ cognitive resources. More importance attached to
affective factors on the part of teachers, examiners and students means more
effective foreign language learning. As Dewaele (2011) posits, learners assume new
personalities while they are using different languages, to a certain extent, they
become different people. Therefore, classes which are taught in an emotionally
sterile way are not likely to prepare the students to be truly proficient users of the
language.
As it has been implied above, most cognitive processes cannot be separated from
affective processes, they are learning foundations of equal importance. The absence
of emotion limits human reasoning and, as Damasio (in Arnold, 1999, p. 1) claims
“certain aspects of emotion and feeling are indispensable for rationality”. On the
other hand, there is a need to regulate debilitative affective arousal by means of
thoughtful control in order to achieve the best possible results and maintain a good
rate of progress.
1.3 Self and Self-related Concepts
For a thorough understanding of one of the affective factors, i.e. self-esteem, which
is the key construct in the book, the concept of self needs to be defined. According
to Coopersmith (1967), (whose work is one of the tenets of theory and research on
self-esteem, hence frequent references to it in the current book), it consists of the
abstractions formed about the object of observation, that is the person. ‘The bases
for the abstractions are the individual’s observations of their own behaviour and the
way other individuals respond to his attitudes, appearance and performance’ (p. 20).
Self-observations and feedback information from others are the tenets of all the
self-related concepts.
Research on the self has led to the recognition and ongoing discussion of several
self-related constructs. Self-esteem, self-concept and self-efficacy, to mention just a
few, may seem to be close in meaning but, at the closer inspection, they do differ.
They are all forms of self-appraisal, i.e. self-evaluation, related to an individual’s
observation and reflection on one’s value, attributes capacities, etc. Still, they are
believed by some researchers to represent various levels of specificity (Harter,
1.3 Self and Self-related Concepts 9
1999; Marsh & Yeung, 1998; Skaalvik & Hagvet, 1990), and different proportions
of affective and cognitive components.
The focal construct self-esteem, which is an affective response to self (Wojciszke
& Doliński in Fila-Jankowska, 2009), has been under research for over a hundred
years due to its tremendous influence on human behaviour.
1.3.1 Self-esteem from the Historical Perspective
Looking from the historical perspective, one may discern varied approaches
towards the concept of self-esteem, varied perspectives in which its definitions were
developed, as well as varied claims about the antecedents and consequences of high
or low self-esteem for an individual. Table 1.1 contains core information about the
main contributors to the development of the concept as well as attempted qualifi-
cations of the approach assumed by the researchers. It also contains concise defi-
nitions of the construct coined by the founding fathers of the idea.
A closer inspection of the content of the table shows that the construct escapes
unequivocal interpretations, but is connected with the feelings of worthiness,
subject to external influences and correlated with one’s own successes and failures.
It is associated with overall psychological well-being, personal satisfaction and
effective functioning. On the other hand, it may be responsible for anxiety and
depression and in extreme situations even for suicidal attempts. All things con-
sidered, it may have a tremendous influence on the quality of life. For this reason,
self-esteem has provided a focus for psychological studies to date. Its understanding
Table 1.1 The major contributors to the development of the construct self-esteem
Researcher Approach Definition
James (1890) Psychoanalytic An affective phenomenon, dynamic, subject to change,
depends on successes and failures, a ratio of achievements to
aspirations, open to enhancement
White (1963) Psychodynamic A developmental phenomenon, determined by own
accomplishments (internally) and the affirmation of others,
affecting behaviour, affected by experience
Rosenberg Sociocultural A product of influences of culture, society, family,
(1965) interpersonal relationships
Coopersmith Behavioural An acquired trait, an expression of worthiness, influenced by
(1967) parents and others, linked to anxiety and depression
Branden Humanistic, A basic human need defined by the sense of worthiness and
(1969) philosophical competence, low level has serious consequences (suicidal
attempts, depression, anxiety), dynamic in nature
Epstein Cognitive A basic human need, consequence of one’s understanding of
(1985) the world and others and one’s relation to them, hierarchical
in nature: global, intermediate, situational
Adopted from Mruk (1999)
has broadened and it may be worthwhile to elaborate on its most comprehensive

definition. Self-esteem is the global evaluation of the self, or a “positive or negative
attitude towards the self as a totality” (Rosenberg, Schooler, Schoenbach, &
Rosenberg, 1995, p. 141). It refers to the way people feel about themselves and the
value people place on themselves. It is “the evaluation which the individual makes
and customarily maintains with regard to himself: it expresses an attitude of
approval or disapproval, and indicates the extent to which the individual believes
himself to be capable, significant, successful, and worthy” (Coopersmith, 1967,
p. 5).
The sense of competence or capability and worthiness is emphasised in many
definitions of the construct (Branden, 1995; Kohn, 1994; Shackelford & Michalski,
2011), according to which competence means seeing oneself as capable of coping
with the basic challenges of life, while worthiness is synonymous with a sense of
integrity and satisfaction. People value what they can do and who they are.
According to James (in Coopersmith, 1967), self-esteem is a ratio of a person’s
pretensions (goals and purposes) to his or her successes (perceptions of achieve-
ment of the goal) in the areas that the person finds important. Branden (1995) adds
yet another hue to the palette of self-esteem definitions by saying that it is the
disposition to view oneself as being worthy of happiness and other people’s love
and acceptance. Guindon (2002) argues that, in fact, healthy self-esteem is partially
derived from the feedback from the environment (as well as from the awareness of
competence and sense of achievement). Briefly speaking, self-esteem reflects and
affects transactions with the people encountered every day (Kernis, 2003).
Self-esteem includes cognitive, affective and behavioural components (Mercer,
2011). The cognitive one pertains to conscious thinking about oneself and reflecting
on the discrepancy between the ideal self (pretensions) and the perceived self
(realistic appraisal of successes. The affective component refers to emotions evoked
by the discrepancy. The behavioural dimension is revealed in such behaviours as
resilience, assertiveness, decisiveness and being respectful of other people
(Reasoner, www.self-esteem-nase.org/what.php).
For the purposes of this book the working definition of the construct encom-
passes the aspects of self-liking and competence. Self-esteem is viewed as the value
people place on themselves, derived from their perceived achievement and feed-
back from significant others and the sense of competence that they experience when
they are confronted with a challenge, such as learning a second language.
1.3.2 The Typology of Self-esteem
There have been numerous attempts at organizing the theories of self-esteem into a
coherent typology. The present part is an overview of self-esteem types relevant to
educational context. Taking a glance at the bottom box of Table 1.1, one can notice
that, as a hierarchical construct (Epstein, 1985), self-esteem can be analysed at three
levels of specificity:
• global—general self-worth, global perception of self as a person

• intermediate—specific to certain domains, for example academic competence,
social interaction, communicative ability, etc.
• situational—everyday manifestations of self-esteem, self-evaluations of beha-
viour in specific situations (Mruk, 1999).
Brown (1994) presents another model, more frequently used in educational context,
which largely resembles the previous one but contains slightly different
terminology:
• global self-esteem—the individual’s positive or negative attitude toward the
self, derived from assessments people make of the external world
• situational or specific self-esteem—self-appraisals in particular spheres of life
such as work, education (for example L2 acquisition in general) social life, etc.,
or on personal traits (intelligence, honesty, communicative ability, etc.)
• task self-esteem—refers to self-evaluations of particular tasks within specific
situations or selected subject-matter area (pitching in baseball, the multiplication
table a particular aspect of language acquisition, etc.)
The factual content of the two models is similar. In both of them the global level
refers to general self-perception. The intermediate facet denotes domain-specific
self-appraisals, while the bottom one represents the most specific dimension per-
taining to self-evaluation in concrete situations. Anderson (2002) introduces yet
another name for intermediate/specific self-esteem, i.e. selective self-esteem, which
she defines as “an evaluation of specific and constituent traits or qualities, or both,
within the self (…) combined into an overall evaluation of self” (ibid, p. 2). It is
related to the previous two models in essence as it reflects the multifaceted nature of
the concept, which proves unanimity among the researchers. The area of termi-
nology is diversified but, as a matter of fact, the hierarchical structure of the con-
struct of self-esteem is beyond question.
Due to the immediate reference to task performance, Brown’s model seems to be
more relevant to SLA context. Learners’ self-beliefs formed in the situation of
language learning exemplify, in a fairly straightforward way, the construct that the
author termed situational or specific self-esteem, while the self-appraisals made in
confrontation with various language tasks correspond with task self-esteem.
1.3.3 Other Typologies of Self-esteem
The attempts at conceptualizing the construct have led researchers to discovering

manifold variations of it as well as identifying controversies about its nature. By no
means is the multidimensionality claim or the dichotomy of high and low
self-esteem sufficiently explanatory and valid. The attempts at systematizing the
theoretical formulations have resulted in proliferation of classifications of
self-esteem. The most frequently used taxonomies are: trait and state, contingent
and true, explicit and implicit, fragile and genuine self-esteem.
1.3.3.1 Trait and State Self-esteem
One of the most widely recognized distinctions is between trait and state
self-esteem. Both global and domain-specific self-esteem may be treated as trait and
state phenomena. The trait position proposes that self-esteem is a personal attribute,
which means that some people are predisposed to hold themselves in high or low
regard. The state self-esteem is self-regard experienced in particular situations
(Crocker & Wolfe, 2001; Crozier, 1997). Global trait self-esteem is the way that
people think and feel about their entire selves in general, for example, “All in all, I
am a valuable person”. It is connected with the level of life satisfaction and the
predisposition for seeing oneself in a positive light. It is relatively stable across time
and circumstances (Brown & Marshall, 2006). Global state self-esteem conveys
self-evaluative emotions and thoughts in reaction to situations and success or failure
experiences. For example, a person’s sense of self-worth may drop dramatically
after a divorce.
Similarly, domain-specific self-evaluations may be thought of as traits and states.
By the same token, they have their typical, average face (for example, “I am good at
music”) or their momentary face, fluctuating according to the state (for example,
“Recently, I haven’t been a success in music”). The scope of such fluctuations does
not seem to be large but may increase or decrease the person’s self-liking
(Heatherton & Polivy, 1991).
1.3.3.2 Contingent and True Self-esteem
Both global and domain-specific self-esteem can be contingent, that is based on

standard expectations concerning appearance, social approval, family support,
school performance, perception of God’s love, etc. (see Crocker & Wolfe, 2001;
Deci & Ryan, 1995). People vary in the contingencies on which their self-esteem
depends and in the intensity of this dependence. For example, interaction with
significant others, like parents who attach too much importance to a child’s
achievements, may seriously affect his or her self-worth (Hu, Yang, Wang, & Liu,
2008; Neighbors, Larimar, Geisner, & Knee, 2004). Poor performance may evoke
feelings of incompetence and shame. It can result in reflections like ‘I am good and
valuable only if I perform well’, and preoccupations with meeting evaluative
standards. Continual concern about where one falls on the evaluative scale makes
self-esteem contingent and unstable. Deci and Ryan (1995) emphasise that when an
individual achieves continual success, their self-esteem may seem stable but if the
successes cease to appear, the self-worth feelings will dramatically deteriorate. All
in all, “for people with contingent high self-esteem, the pursuit and maintenance of
positive self-regard often becomes the prime directives that channel their thoughts,
feelings and behaviours” (Kernis, 2003, p. 8).
Crocker and Wolfe (2001) claim that not all types of contingencies are equally
important to one’s self-esteem. In their view, only (perceived) successes and fail-
ures in the domains on which a person has staked their self-esteem can lead to its
rises and falls. People vary in the contingencies on which they base their self-worth.
For some it may be based on competencies or God’s love (internal), in others—on
social approval or disapproval (interpersonal). Overall, interpersonal contingencies
are more beyond one’s control, and thereby harder to satisfy. High self-esteem
results from relationships or activities that help a person to satisfy his or her
contingencies of self-worth. Conversely, low self-esteem may be the consequence
of choosing relationships or activities in which it is harder to satisfy one’s con-
tingencies of self-worth. According to Crocker and Wolfe, “instability of
self-esteem is not itself a personality characteristic but rather is a function of a
person’s contingencies of self-worth in concert with that person’s local environ-
ment” (ibid: 597). Thus, if the person’s local environment lets him or her satisfy
their contingencies, the level of self-esteem remains stable, but a sudden change in
the local environment may cause instability. In such circumstances people may
increase the effort towards succeeding in order to avoid drops in self-esteem, or
withdraw and look for an alternate contingency (“I may not excel at Maths but I am
quite good at computer studies”). The latter strategy, called disengagement,
although valuable, is relatively difficult to apply (Vonk & Smit, 2011).
Kernis (2003) postulates the existence of non-contingent, i.e. true high
self-esteem, underpinned by unshakeable sense of self-worth, unconditioned by
attainment of specific outcomes. It develops when “one’s actions are
self-determined and congruent with one’s inner core self, rather than reflection of
externally imposed or internally based demands” (p. 8). Therefore, it does not have
to be struggled for, or “earned”, and it cannot be “withdrawn”. Temporary failures
do not undermine secure high self-esteem but they indicate to its holders how to
improve performance in future. Lower achievement may evoke feelings of disap-
pointment or sadness, but does not cause despair or devastation. Vonk and Smit
(2011) argue that absolutely stable and non-contingent self-esteem is not optimal as
it may result from defensive strategies (for example reality distortion, rigidness,
refusing to accept failure) that protect self-worth from threats. If one’s self-esteem is
not affected by any experience, there is no stimulus for self-improvement, while
experiencing fluctuations in self-esteem due to one’s successes or failures may
motivate people to pursue self-development and adapt to their environment. The
authors agree with Crocker and Wolfe (2001) that people who base their
self-esteem on extrinsic factors, such as social approval, tend to have lower or less
stable self-esteem, while those with high intrinsic contingencies experience more
personal well-being and positive affect. Having intrinsic/internal contingencies
promotes adaptability, and personal growth, therefore the situation is labeled as
optimal.
1.3.3.3 Explicit and Implicit, Fragile and Genuine Self-esteem
Some of the qualitative distinctions made in reference to self-esteem are related to

the level of awareness of its holder. Branden (1995) argues that an individual
possesses two kinds of self-esteem—conscious (explicit), that he/she is aware of,
and nonconscious (implicit) that is hidden from the self and others. Nonconscious
self-esteem is the effect of self-beliefs on an appraisal of objects related to the self
and unrelated to the self. The effect is impossible to identify via introspection. It is
measured through the observation of performance in diagnostic tasks, which elicit
responses that escape the subject’s control (Fila-Jankowska, 2009).
Conscious self-esteem, measured through self-description may be either genuine
or spurious. Coopersmith (1967) warns that the researcher may obtain an ungenuine
expression of self-esteem when a subject attempts to present an ‘upgraded’ picture
of himself in the hope of gaining social acceptance or concealing from others the
low regard that he has for himself. The combination of concealed negative
self-evaluations and overtly presented positive ones is called defensive self-esteem
(Kernis, 2003). It is opposed to genuine self-esteem which is characterized by the
consistency of publicly presented self-beliefs and inner, unrevealed self-feelings.
The distortions from genuine evaluation certainly provide an invalid index of
self-esteem. The in-depth study of the construct of self-esteem by Kernis (2003)
enables to gain a better insight into the matter, and contributes to at least partial
explanation of the complex nature of it. In his view, the qualification of self-esteem
as either high or low is simplistic. Low self-esteem, as he maintains, is observable
in only a low proportion of participants, who suffer from mental disorders. They
consistently make statements about themselves which reflect sheer dislike or dis-
satisfaction with themselves. According to the article published by Baumeister,
Tice, and Hutton (1989, p. 1), a high number of individuals “typically give
responses on self-esteem inventories that hover around the midpoint of response
scales”. This implies rather neutral self-feelings. The observation may be explained
by the afore mentioned “upgrading” of the self-presentation and softening the
negativity of self-portrayal.
The controversy concerning the authenticity of low self-esteem is also relevant
to the study of high self-esteem, which reflects positive feelings of self-worth, yet
being fragile and vulnerable to threat in many cases. Some high self-esteem holders
may ‘take a variety of measures to bolster, maintain, and enhance’ their self-beliefs
(p. 3). The self-protective and self-enhancement attempts reflect the lack of stability
of the overtly declared high self-esteem. Without them high self-esteem would turn
into low. Kernis (2003) uses the term fragile high self-esteem to refer to the cases in
which individuals deftly apply such strategies. The strategies distinguish it from
secure high self-esteem, characterized by well-anchored, unthreatened sense of
worthiness possessed by people who value, respect and accept themselves,
including their weaker points. Their sense of self-worth does not ‘require continual
validation nor is it highly vulnerable to threats’ (p. 4) That does not mean that they
are totally indifferent to a failure but their poor performance and disappointing
feedback does not afflict their overall self-acceptance.
There is a discernible parallel between Deci and Ryan’s (2003) idea of contin-
gent self-esteem and Kernis’ fragile self-esteem, which is high only if an individual
manages to satisfy certain self or other-imposed criteria. The criteria regard social
approval, appearance, performance or other factors (Crocker & Wolfe, 2001; Deci
& Ryan, 1995). In the case of self-esteem contingent on social approval, the
individual’s interaction with authoritarian, controlling others, usually parents or
teachers, has a direct influence on self-worth. Their acceptance is crucial for
self-acceptance. The impact of appearance or performance on self-esteem may be
illustrated by attributions such as “I am a valuable person only if I am slim/I
perform outstandingly in exams”, etc. The contingencies are prime directives that
lead to evaluating oneself under pressure of failing to meet expectations, pressures
and self-imposed standards (Neighbors et al., 2004). Contingent self-esteem is
contrasted with true high self-esteem which does not have to be earned or struggled,
but it is self-determined and “congruent with one’s inner, core self” (Kernis, 2003,
p. 8).
Regardless of which typology one chooses, researchers agree that people with
genuine, secure or true high self-esteem enjoy better psychological health and the
state of well-being. They are less likely to experience outbursts of anger and
hostility, which in the case of their less stable counterparts may be aimed at
restoring impaired self-worth. Crocker and Nuer (2003), Kernis (2003), use the
term “optimal self-esteem” to refer to the feelings of worthiness which result from
coping with life challenges successfully and forming relationships in which one is
valued for who one is, rather than for one’s attainments. Behavioural choices are
determined by one’s true, authentic self, not by the need to be accepted by others.
Self-esteem is optimal when it is not pursued by an individual directly, nor attempts
are made at increasing or protecting it. As Reasoner states, “when one is creating or
contributing to something larger than the self, one is more likely to (…) foster
self-regulation and mental and physical health” (www.self-esteem-nase.org/
research.shtml). Besides, optimal self-esteem is characterized by favourable
implicit feelings of self-worth. The combination of high explicit and high implicit
self-esteem is a ‘formula’ for authentic, unthreatened, optimal self-esteem,
unconditioned by specific outcomes and unlikely to undergo substantial
fluctuations.
1.3.4 The Antecedents of Self-esteem
The sources or roots of self-esteem have been the focus of research for decades and
their list is relatively long (e.g. Baumeister & Vohs, 2007; Coopersmith, 1967;
Kernis, Brown, & Brody, 2000; Neiss, Stevenson, & Sedikides, 2006;
Trzesniewski, Donellan, & Robins, 2003). Generally, it has been acknowledged
that positive or negative self-appraisals, that is acts of judging one’s own activity
and achievement, are attributable to a variety of factors that appear at different
stages of life. The self-appraisals are generated through action and interaction with
the world (Schwalbe, Gecas, & Baxter, 1986). If one looks at the determinants of
self-esteem from the historical perspective, the theorists and investigators from the
first half of the 20th century identified four major sources:
• Respectful and accepting attitude of significant others, as a result of which
people value themselves as they are valued. It concerns oneself and their
extensions—family, property, reputation, etc. (Adler, Mead, & Horney;
Rosenberg in Coopersmith, 1967).
• The history of a person’s past successes and failures as well as the status
possessed. Success is defined by the standards of the community that the
individual lives in and may be embodied by power, significance, virtue and
competence. High self-esteem may follow from meaningful achievement in any
of the areas, even if achievement in the remaining areas is poor (James, 1890).
• Living up to aspirations in areas of life that an individual considers important—
academic performance, family life, physique, etc.
• Manner of responding to devaluation and thereby defending self-esteem; han-
dling stressing situations, failure, threat, etc. in a way that does not affect one’s
sense of worthiness (Horney, 1950).
The major 20th century investigation into the determinants of self-esteem was
conducted by Coopersmith (1967), who propounded that children’s self-esteem is
determined by the following factors:
• social background,
• parental characteristics,
• personal characteristics
• parent-child relationships.
The model won great popularity and became a foundation for many later attempts at
systematizing sources of self-regard. Therefore, it is presumably worth explaining
in a more detailed way.
1.3.4.1 Social Background
The aspects of social background that are potentially pertinent to a young person’s
self-esteem are: socioeconomic status, religion, parents’ employment and social
problems. High socioeconomic status may appear to be conducive to high
self-esteem, however, as Coopersmith (1967) claims, there is a rather weak relation
between the variables. People from the upper middle class are more likely to have
high self-esteem than the representatives of the lower classes but the tendency is not
very clear. Rosenberg and Pearlin (1978) posit that there is a modest interdepen-
dence for adults. Another aspect of the social background that might have notable
consequences for the level of self-esteem is religious affiliation. However, as
Coopersmith (1967) postulates, there are no significant differences between the
level of self-esteem of people representing three major faiths—the Catholic,
Protestant or Jewish religion. The dimension of social background that is related to
self-esteem is parents’ work history. The father’s regular employment positively

influences their children’s high self-esteem. The children whose fathers have longer
periods of unemployment are less likely to possess positive self-worth
(Coopersmith, 1967). Wiltfang and Scarbecz (1990) add that a mother’s length
of employment is positively related to the children’s self-esteem. The higher the
child’s self-esteem, the more likely it is that the mother’s employment was
undisturbed and long-lasting, and that the mother has a positive attitude to her
work. Veselska, Madarasova-Geckova, Gajdosova, Orosova, van Dijk, and
Reijneveld (2010) adds that among adolescents higher socio-economic status is
more conducive to higher self-esteem than among children, and family income is a
preponderant factor in this context. Sherer and Enbal (2006) attribute lower levels
of self-esteem to social problems in the family, such as poverty, alcoholism or
difficulties in acculturation. The factors responsible for devastating effects are
experiences such as physical abuse by parents, family conflicts and homelessness.
In the broad understanding, social background does not have a dramatic effect on
self-esteem, yet the immediate social context such as parents’ successful employ-
ment is important. Dysfunctional families severely impair the children’s self-worth.
1.3.4.2 Parental Characteristics and Parent-Child Relationships
Apart from the aspects of economic nature, some psychological features of social
background, such as parental characteristics and the quality of parent-child rela-
tionships are regarded as determining factors in the development of a child’s
self-worth. Coopersmith (1967) viewed them as a separate category of determi-
nants, but they conceivably fall under the broad heading of social background
factors. Affection for children, emotional stability and balanced proportion of
support and demand appear to lay foundations for the child’s self-esteem.
Parents who convey affection are more likely to rear children who report higher
self-esteem (Baharudin & Zulkefly, 2009). Genuine concern of parents related to
the choice of friends, private affairs, etc. is conducive to the child’s sense of
self-worth. So is parents’ availability, not only in case of distress, but also during
pleasurable, joint activities (Coopersmith, 1967).
One of the salient characteristics of mothers of high self-esteem children is their
emotional stability and healthy self-esteem (ibid). Mothers of low self-esteem
children reveal low levels of confidence and assurance, and they show more con-
cern with pleasing others than with self-competence or their feeling of success.
Attentive fathers, in turn, whose male children find it natural to confide in, are likely
to bring up high-rated self-esteem holders. Richards, Rollerson, and Phillips (1991)
modified Coopersmith’s (1967) observation claiming that the support of mothers is
more important to sons, while the support of fathers enhances daughters’
self-beliefs. Children with supportive parents develop more positive friendships
(Sherer & Enbal, 2006). Surprising though it may seem, greater demands placed on
a child and a consistent approach to discipline contribute to his/her healthy
self-esteem. What is more, excessive permissiveness may have an opposite effect.
As Coopersmith (1967) explains ‘the regulatory procedures employed by the par-

ents of children with high self-esteem are firm, clear, and demanding but cannot be
termed rigid, inflexible, or unduly restrictive’ (1967, p. 189). Parental common
sense is probably the most important element bridging the gap between Victorian
discipline and modern permissiveness. Reasonable restrictions prove parents’
concern for the child but, it has to be emphasized is that the relationship between
parents and children has to be sound and based on mutual respect rather than on
authoritarian practices.
Another aspect of upbringing for healthy self-esteem is allowing a child the right
to an independent opinion and readiness to compromise when differences appear.
Children who take part in planning and decision-making at home develop high
levels of self-belief. Appreciation of the rights, opinions and judgements of a child
is yet another expression of respect that is an indispensable ingredient of wise,
esteem-oriented parenting approach. By contrast, divorce, separation, remarriage
often have a damaging effect on children’s self-esteem. Similarly destructive
(especially to girls), is an incompatible interaction between the parents and an
excessive amount of conflict and tension (Amato, 1986; Esmaeili & Yaacob, 2012).
By and large, parental features and what parents do to children exert a measurable
influence on the child’s posture (Roberts & Bengston, 1993). Idealistic as it may
sound, happy and stable families with self-reliant mothers and close, trustworthy
fathers are most likely to provide environment for the upbringing of a
self-respecting child.
1.3.4.3 Personal Characteristics
It seems that certain features of physique go with an individual’s self-esteem.

Besides, positive attitude to self and others, successful social interaction as well as
the ability to express emotions and set oneself ambitious goals are intertwined with
the self-regard that one builds up. Physical characteristics may be a source of both
positive and negative feelings about oneself. Self-perceived attractiveness is posi-
tively related to self-esteem, especially in female adolescents (Crocker & Wolfe,
2001; Harter, 1999). In the case of young males, strength and prowess are important
for their positive self-regard, while height carries less importance. In children, weak
locomotor skills may be the cause of lower sense of self-worth (Coopersmith,
1967).
As far as the affective states are concerned, Kwan, Kuang, and Hui (2009) claim
that one of the possible sources that healthy self-esteem is derived from is a positive
attributional style that they call benevolence. The term means a positive, accepting
attitude towards the self and others that some people hold throughout their lives
regardless of circumstances. Too much self-love, however, that Kwan et al.
(2009) name bias, results in an inflated level of self-esteem (narcissism), which
means feeling better than others and the inability to admit one’s flaws. Low
self-esteem holders, meanwhile have poorer emotional lives and tend to be less
expressive in their emotions than their high self-esteem counterparts. However, the
direction of causality is not clear in this respect. Frequently, people with a low rate
of self-liking reveal high levels of anxiety, distress and tension, and generally are
viewed as less happy and more despondent. They are more likely to report psy-
chosomatic symptoms related to the increased anxiety level, such as insomnia,
nervousness, nail biting or loss of appetite.
In terms of aspirations, lower esteem persons tend to set themselves lower
standards, and, actually, they are likely to be less efficient in achieving them,
although they claim to crave success. The discrepancy is explained by their lack of
confidence in own capacities and fear that their ambitions would remain unfulfilled
(Coopersmith, 1967). Generally, unhappy affect, unpleasant bodily symptoms and
bleak outlook for the future characterize people who regard themselves
unfavourably.
‘Human beings are characterized by a pervasive drive to maintain significant
interpersonal relationships’ (Leary, 1999, p. 33). During adolescence the role of
parents in building their children’s self-esteem declines in favour of peers, who
become important agents of socialization. Young people who build satisfying peer
relationships report higher level of self-esteem. Friends alone, though, do not
contribute to self-esteem but they continue to do it after parents have laid the
foundations (Sherer & Enbal, 2006). It remains an unresolved issue whether the
number of friends is related to the level of self-esteem. Townsend (in Emler, 2001)
says that in adolescents self-esteem is more closely related to the perception of the
intimacy of their friendships than to their popularity (number of friends). In contrast
with Townsend’s claim, Wiltfang and Scarbecz (1990) argue that adolescents’
perceptions of the number of friends and the degree to which they occupy a
leadership position do affect their self-esteem. Older adolescents, having gained
more social experience, learn to choose support groups that offer them respect and
positive regard which strengthen their self-confidence (Sherer & Enbal, 2006).
A low level of self-esteem in adolescence is a predictor of loneliness in adult life
(Olmsted, Davis, Garner, & Eagle, 1991). It acts as a monitor of the likelihood of
social exclusion. When a person behaves in a way that makes exclusion more
probable, she or he experiences a drop in self-esteem (Heatherton & Wyland,
2003). Self-esteem is a sociometer of acceptance or rejection—a psychological
mechanism that controls the extent to which an individual is accepted and valued by
others (Leary, 1999).
1.3.4.4 The Experience of Success and Failure
The attempts at answering the question of how far successes or failures determine
self-perceptions was initiated by the pioneers of self-esteem research (Coopersmith,
1967; James, 1890) and there have been numerous more recent studies whose aim
was to take a deeper insight into the matter (Baumeister, Campbell, Krueger, &
Vohs, 2003; Hoge, Smit, & Hanson, 1990; Marsh, 1992; Rosenberg et al., 1995;
Skaalvik & Hagtvet, 1990). In popular beliefs, a person’s self-esteem may appear to
be an aggregate construct that derives from a range of successes and failures that the
person has experienced. Researchers, however, have taken into consideration a

possible link between the feeling of self-worth and achievement (success) in dif-
ferent domains. The results are rather consistent, and they confirm the existence of
the link, but they vary as far as the strength of it is concerned. The link is far
stronger if an individual considers the area as important. This observation is directly
related to James’s theory, according to which self-esteem depends on achievement
measured against aspiration in areas that a person finds important (e.g. Vonk &
Smit, 2011). Thus, for a majority of the population there may be a very low or no
correlation between appearance and self-worthiness, unlike for teenage girls for
whom it may reach significant values due to the degree of importance that they
attach to their physique. The question which naturally arises in educational context
is whether self-esteem is related to school achievement, and more specifically,
success in second language acquisition. Another important question concerns the
direction of causality in the potential correlation between these variables. The
matter will receive due attention in the further parts of the book.
Another interesting area of human activity that has been proved to have an
impact on the level of self-regard is job-related. Orth, Trzesniewski and Robins
(2010) maintain that a position of power and status enhance the feelings of
self-esteem. Conversely, several studies (Goldsmith, Buss, & Lemery, 1997; Hoare
& Machin, 2010; Muller, Hicks, & Wincour, 1993; Prause & Dooley, 2004)
indicate that long unemployment and unsatisfactory employment account for lower
scores on self-esteem measures, although the effect is not very strong. There is no
common standpoint, however, as to the causal direction of the influence.
Researchers emphasize that unemployment can have numerous consequences
which can have a direct effect on self-esteem—social isolation, economic stress,
loss of social support, etc. Hoare and Machin (2010) voice an interesting opinion
that high self-esteem may act as a moderator of the impact of unemployment on
self-esteem, i.e. it may buffer some of the negative effects.
The work environment is associated with self-evaluation, and it generates three
possible determinants of self-esteem: reflected appraisals, social comparisons, and
self-perceptions (Schwalbe et al., 1986). Reflected appraisals are the reactions of
superiors and workmates to one’s performance, which he or she perceives and
interprets as self-relevant information. Social comparisons are carried out in order
to obtain more self-relevant information and find out whether one outperforms, is
outperformed by others, or is similar to others. Self-perceptions are observations of
one’s behaviour and its outcomes that convey further self-evaluative information.
The importance of the three sources of self-evaluation depends on how the person
attends to them, namely, to what extent their self-esteem is contingent on the
occupational sphere of life. It also depends on certain personality characteristics.
For instance, persons who seek social approval may be more sensitive to reflected
appraisals; those who have a pressing need to conform, may derive their self-related
information from social comparisons; and those oriented towards power and control
may attach most importance to self-perception of competence (ibid).
1.3.4.5 Genetic Influences
Apart from an environmentally determined component, self-esteem also has an

inheritable one. According to the results of research conducted by Neiss, Stevenson,
and Sedikides (2006), in adults heritability estimates fall between 32 and 40% while
in adolescents the proportions are unstable. In mid-adolescents the genetic com-
ponent reaches 60% but in early adolescents it is insignificant. In children the
estimates vary from 60% to insignificant values, and it is impossible to formulate
any ultimate conclusions. Trzesniewski et al. (2003) claim that a moderate pro-
portion of 30% is due to genetic factors regardless of age. A different view of the
role of genes is represented by Kernis (2013):
(…) if the genetic throw of the dice causes a child to be intellectually competent, athleti-
cally competent, attractive by current societal standards, and if parents reward those
characteristics and reinforce their importance, then according to James and our own find-
ings, this child is on the path to high self-esteem. (p. 149)
Thus, if children receive a positive feedback on their inherited features of character,

their self-esteem grows, which makes those genetic blessings mediators of
self-regard. With such discrepancies in the models proposed, one can make a rather
cautious observation that the genetic profile that people are born with accounts to
some extent for their future feelings of self-worthiness.
Very broadly speaking, the level of self-esteem may be subject to external and
internal influences (Branden, 1999). The duality was also advocated by
MacDonald, Saltzman, and Leary (2005), who used the terms: intrapersonal and
interpersonal to refer to sources of self-esteem. By intrapersonal sources they
meant a person’s private self-evaluation (a personal eye), while in the interpersonal
perspective self-esteem is viewed as a social construction that results from how
others evaluate an individual (a public eye).
1.3.5 Other Self-related Constructs: Self-concept

and Self-efficacy
As it was mentioned in Sect. 1.3, there are at least two other types of self-belief
constructs which may be confused with self-esteem—self-concept and self-efficacy.
In order to understand pedagogical relevance of the constructs properly, it is
important to explain the similarities and differences between them.
1.3.5.1 Self-concept
Self-concept, like self-esteem, is a set of beliefs about one’ s abilities and attributes,
but it is more specific, which makes it very close to situational/specific/selective
self-esteem presented in Sect. 1.3.1. It consists of “an individual’s self-perceptions
Fig. 1.1 Self-concept model based on Shavelson, Hubner, and Stanton’s model (after Mercer,
2011, p. 21)
and self-evaluations in specific domains” that contribute to general perception of

oneself (Mercer, 2011, p. 15). The domains may be connected with physical fea-
tures, for example attractive appearance or athletic skills; social sphere of life—
being popular with peers; or academic activity—verbal or mathematical compe-
tence and skills. Figure 1.1 illustrates the hierarchical model of self-concept pre-
sented in 1976 by Shavelson, Hubner, and Stanton (Lau, Yeung, Jin, & Low, 1999).
According to the model, the apex of the hierarchy is represented by general
self-concept, which is divided into academic and nonacademic self-concept facets.
The academic branch is further represented by Verbal and Maths dimensions,
which, in turn are subdivided into individual academic subject self-concepts. At the
bottom level one can find Maths, Biology, English, foreign languages (for example
English) self-concept, etc. The results of research indicate that general self-concept
correlates highly with academic self-concept and slightly lower with
subject-specific self-concept (Byrne, 1986). As a result of further study conducted
by Marsh, Byrne, and Shavelson (1988), two additional higher order factors were
added to Maths and Verbal academic self-concepts—Physical Education and Art
(Mercer, 2011). The nonacademic self-concept further decomposes into more
specific facets of social life (with even more specific branches of family and peer
self-concept), physical appearance and emotional life self-concepts (Akande, 2008).
The issue of relevance for the present book is the subordinate of the verbal
self-concept, namely the foreign languages self-concept, specified even further as
English language self-concept. It was claimed by Lau et al. (1999) that a ‘global’
English self-concept is derived from self-perceptions related to four major language
skills—listening, speaking, reading and writing. The researchers propose that the
hierarchical nature of the construct accounts for strong domain-specific dimensions
of the concept.
Skaalvik and Skaalvik (2002) identified five major antecedents of self-concept:

(1) Frames of reference—standards of social comparison, measuring own traits
and achievement against others’ attributes and achievements; the most impor-
tant determinant of self-concept.
(2) Causal attributions—the factors to which an individual relates their successes
and failures; the relation is of reciprocal nature—the causal attributions made
for previous successes and failures affect self-concept and self-concept formed
in this way exerts an influence on subsequent attributions. One may notice
resemblance to the intrinsic antecedent of self-esteem mentioned in Sect. 1.4 as
a manner of responding to devaluation.
(3) Reflected appraisals from significant others—taking a view of oneself which is
a reflection of how others view them, a critical and significant source of
information about oneself. There is a direct reference to the interpersonal source
of self-esteem, i.e. respectful and accepting attitude of significant others
described by Coopersmith (1967) (see: Sect. 1.3.4).
(4) Mastery experiences—feedback from an individual’s past experiences in a
particular domain. The analogy with self-esteem is to be found in Sect. 1.4 in
the section about the history of past successes and failures.
(5) Psychological centrality—self-assessments of attributes and competences that
are considered by an individual as important or psychologically central. There
is a measure of similarity to one of the intrapersonal antecedents of self-esteem
defined in Sect. 1.4 as living up to aspirations in areas of life that a person
regards as important.
Looking at the range of antecedents, one may conclude that self-concept loads
mainly on experiences with the environment and influence of significant others. It is
regarded as a dynamic, multidimensional construct which exerts an important
influence on and is remarkably affected by an individual’s social transactions. As a
matter of fact, self-concept borders on self-esteem, and in the literature of the
subject the terms global self-esteem and general self-concept are often used syn-
onymously (Rosenberg et al., 1995). They share the quality of being hierarchical.
Self-esteem is viewed as a construct which is more affective in essence, while
self-concept is perceived as more cognitive (ibid). The issue of further similarities
and differences will be given due consideration in the subsequent section on the
interdependence between self-related constructs.
1.3.5.2 Self-efficacy
In comparison with self-esteem and self-concept, self-efficacy has a rather short

history of research. In 1977, Bandura defined the term in the following way:
‘Perceived efficacy refers to beliefs in one’s capabilities to organize and execute the
courses of action required to produce given attainments’ (p. 3). Self-efficacy is the
expression of self-confidence in competence and skills to complete specific tasks. It
influences the choices people make in specific situations, for example—whether to

start working on a task. It also has an impact on the amount of effort invested in the
task and the level of persistence when difficulties arise (Sander & Sanders, 2006). It
is closely connected with the sense of personal control, known also as internal locus
of control—the expectation that outcomes are dependent on one’s effort and action.
The sense of control is acquired through experience. Experience of success or
failure leads to either active or passive attitude to new challenges (Ross & Broh,
2000). People with high self-efficacy have higher motivation to cope and are more
likely to make attempts at solving problems and persist in the face of aversive
experiences. They attribute their success to their own choices and strategies (Vonk
& Smit, 2011). Those who have serious doubts about their capacities weaken their
efforts or give up completely. Moreover, abandoning the striving becomes a source
of stress and may lead to depression symptoms. At comparable levels of ability,
self-efficacious individuals are more likely to achieve successful outcomes
(Rosenberg et al., 1995).
Self-efficacy represents the highest level of specificity when compared with
self-esteem and self-concept. In the hierarchical model of self-esteem, it corre-
sponds to task—self esteem. To give an example—a self-efficacy judgement is the
belief that one can make a hotel reservation in a foreign language or can swim crawl
a hundred metres. The major antecedents of self-efficacy are:
1. Enactive mastery experience. Past experiences with the given type of task serve
as an important source of information for self-efficacy. Past successes enhance
self-efficacy, past failures lower it.
2. Vicarious experience. Observing other people’s performance on particular tasks
also contributes to strengthening or weakening one’s own self-efficacy levels.
3. Verbal persuasion. Verbal persuasion and evaluative feedback from significant
others also shape one’s self-efficacy, especially when the significant others are
perceived as knowledgeable and the information is perceived as reliable. Yet,
verbal persuasion can be easily outweighed by self-efficacy formed by mastery
experience.
4. Physiological reactions. Purely physiological symptoms, like sweating,
heightened heartbeat rate, aches, etc. may also have an impact on self-efficacy
(Bong & Skaalvik, 2003, p. 6).
As one can see, self-efficacy, self-concept and self-esteem overlap to a certain
extent as far as the sources they spring from are concerned. The role of previous
experience, significant others or social comparison is vital in both cases. However,
as Mercer claims (2011), the construct of self-efficacy is more cognitive in nature
than self-concept or self-esteem, which she labels as more affective. Self-efficacy is
“context-specific assessment of competence to perform a specific task, a judgement
of one’s capabilities to execute specific situations” (Pajares & Miller in Mercer,
2011, p. 15). In contrast, self-concept does not represent that level of specificity and
involves beliefs of self-worth accompanying one’s competence.
1.3.5.3 The Interdependence of Self-esteem, Self-concept

and Self-efficacy
The distinctions between the constructs apparently lie in their generality or speci-
ficity. Although the models proposed by different researchers vary in terminology,
there are areas where they intersect.
A comparison of the self-concept model presented by Shavelson, Hubner, and
Stanton (1976), further developed by Marsh and Shavelson (1985), with the hier-
archical self-esteem models postulated by Brown (1994), Epstein (1985), Mruk
(1999) (see: Sects. 1.3.1 and 1.3.2) leads to the conclusion that there are areas of
commonality between the two frameworks. At the apex of the hierarchy there is
global self-esteem or general self-concept, which are used synonymously in many
studies due to the global nature of both. At the middle level, there is a distinction
between varied domains. In Marsh and Shavelson’s (1985) model, at the middle
level there is a distinction between academic and non-academic self concept, which
in Epstein’s and the other models is referred to as intermediate, specific or situa-
tional self-esteem and there is an evident analogy between the concepts. All of them
refer to self-appraisals in particular domains or life situations. At the lower level
Shavelson et al. (1976) placed more specific academic self-concept, like mathe-
matics self-concept or verbal self-concept, etc., instead of Epstein’s situational
self-esteem. The self-concept extensions do reach situational/or task level (Brown,
2007), but it seems plausible that further development of the levels of specificity
would lead to identifying similar or equivalent facets.
As can be seen from the above comparison, the boundaries between the
self-related concepts are quite permeable, and by no means is there unity among
researchers as far as the typologies are concerned. Lawrence (2006) presents yet
another multidimensional model, in which self-concept encompasses self-esteem
and two other constructs.
In Fig. 1.2 self-concept is placed as an umbrella term at the peak of the diagram
and self-esteem along with self-image and ideal self are subsumed under it.
Self-concept is the totality of an individual’s thoughts and feelings referring to
themselves (a cognitive and an affective component). Self-image is the idea of one’s
own real abilities and attributes, ideal self is the idea of what one would like to be,
while self-esteem is what one feels about the discrepancy between the two.
Understanding self-esteem as the result of measuring one’s real achievements
against pretensions reflects the theory of self-esteem revealed in Principles of
Fig. 1.2 The model of

self-concept (Lawrence, 2006,
p. 3)
Psychology (1890) by one of the pioneer researchers into the construct—William

James (Coopersmith, 1967). James concluded that a person’s aspirations and values
have a basic role in determining how positively s/he regards themselves. If
achievement fulfils aspirations in an area which is personally important, the out-
come is high self-esteem, if achievement is distant from aspirations, self-esteem is
low.
The parallels between the constructs and permeability of borderlines between
them account for a certain degree of freedom in using the terms of self-esteem and
self-concept. In the literature of the subject one can find examples of the terms being
used synonymously. Hoge et al. (1990) discuss global, academic and subject
specific self-esteem, using the term consistently while applying Shavelson et al.’s
model of self-concept. Trautwein, Lüdtke, Köller, and Baumert (2006) state that it
has become common to refer to general self-concept at the apex of the hierarchical
self-concept model as global self-esteem. The convention of referring to the global
self-construct as global self-esteem and its more specific dimensions as self-concept
is observable in more recent literature of the subject (Bong & Skaalvik, 2003;
Byrne, 2002; Marsh & Ayotte, 2003; Marsh, & Craven, 2006; Mercer, 2011). In
this convention self-esteem is the general affective self-evaluation of a person as a
whole, while academic self-concepts and non-academic self-concepts are
domain-specific self-descriptions (Ahmed & Bruinsma, 2006).
Apart from the level of specificity which global self-esteem and specific
self-concept represent, the constructs differ also in the outcomes they give rise to.
Global self-esteem contributes to overall psychological well-being, while specific
self-esteem/self-concept is most relevant to behaviour. Consequently, global
self-worth is not very likely to have a powerful effect on performance. As
Rosenberg et al. (1995, p. 144) claim, “some facets of the self may be peripheral to
feelings of self-worth, whereas others may be central. Unless a particular facet is
important to the individual, there is little reason to think that global self-esteem will
tell us much about a person’s behaviour or performance with respect to that facet”.
By the same token, such behaviour will not reveal much about global self-esteem. It
has been proved, though, that global and specific self-esteem have reciprocal effects
on each other. Empirical findings indicate that more specific forms of self-concept,
for example academic self-concept, tend to have a stronger effect on global
self-esteem, than global forms have on more specific ones (ibid).
Self-efficacy is very close in meaning to task self-esteem, as it is related to very
specific tasks in a domain. In academic context, it refers to “individuals’ convic-
tions that they can successfully perform given academic tasks at designated levels”
(Bong & Skaalvik 2003, p. 6). Presumably, self-efficacy might also be subsumed
under subject-specific self-concept. Bong and Skaalvik (pp. 10–11) observe that
many researchers agree that self-concept comprises the component of self-efficacy,
and that the component may be “the most important building block in one’s
self-concept”. Self-efficacy is measured either by presenting students with problems
to solve and asking them to estimate their confidence that they can solve each of
them, or by asking them to respond to descriptions of problems instead of actual
problems. In the latter version the subjects are asked to answer questions like,
“How confident are you that you can successfully solve equations containing square
roots?” (p. 8). The respondents have to make cognitive evaluations of their per-
ceived capability, without analyzing their feelings evoked by the evaluations.
Osborne and Jones (2011) present yet another explanation of distinctions
between the key self-concepts. They argue that self-concept should be understood
as one’s perception of his or her competence within a domain (e.g., “I am good at
Science”). Their further claim is that self-esteem is the way an individual feels about
his or her self-concept in that domain (e.g., “I am proud of my science ability”).
Thus, self-esteem involves one’s emotional reactions evoked by the evaluation of
abilities. In the light of this theory and Bong and Skaalvik’s (2003) claims,
self-efficacy and self-concept may be qualified as largely cognitive by nature.
Conversely, self-esteem is regarded as the most affective of the three constructs (see
also: Mercer, 2011).
The visual representation of the relations between different models laid out for
the purposes of the volume is presented in Fig. 1.3.
The high order constructs, i.e. global self-esteem or general self-concept occupy
the top position in the diagram depicting their hierarchical and multidimensional
nature. The intermediate level of specificity is represented by domain-specific
self-esteem also known as self-concept comprising academic and non-academic
facets. Academic self-concept loads on Maths and verbal dimensions, further
decomposed into L1 and FL extensions. Via skills self-concept (a learner’s
self-perceptions in listening, speaking, reading and writing in FL) the most specific
level, called task self-concept, synonymous with task self-esteem or self-efficacy is
reached.
Fig. 1.3 The relation between self-esteem, self-concept and self-efficacy

1.4 Self-esteem Development Across the Life Span
Age differences in self-esteem have been researched extensively in view of

important outcomes that its condition can cause in different domains of life (for
example poorer mental and physical health, worse socioeconomic status, etc. to be
discussed in detail in Sect. 1.7). As far as the normative patterns of self-esteem for
different age groups are concerned, there is some discrepancy in the literature of the
subject. According to Wylie (1979), there are no notable age-related differences.
The majority of studies, however, postulate predictable fluctuations in the level of
positive self-regard at different stages of life (e.g. Erol & Orth, 2011; Robins,
Trzesniewski, Tracy, Gosling, & Potter, 2002). It seems worthwhile looking at the
trajectory of self-esteem during consecutive stages of life.
1.4.1 Childhood
The consideration given to children’s self-perceptions should be focused on

domain-specific self-evaluations (e.g. ‘I am good at Maths’), due to the abstract
nature of the construct of global self-esteem. On the whole, children are charac-
terized by high self-esteem ratings, definitely falling above the average values
(Robins et al., 2002). They evaluate themselves far better than they evaluate other
children, which may be related to egocentrism typical of pre-school and early
primary age.
With time, as children progress through primary education, their self-regard
tends to decline (Eccles et al., 1989; Marsh, 1989). They gather experience, con-
front their self-appraisals with those made by their teachers, apply social compar-
ison and verify their early inflated self-beliefs. In the course of time they start
differentiating between their strengths and weaknesses, therefore the mean levels of
global self-esteem become lower but more realistically related to external indicators
of value (achievement, skills, others’ assessment, etc.) (Marsh & Ayotte, 2003).
1.4.2 Adolescence
Self-esteem reveals the tendency to decline during the transition from childhood to
adolescence (Eccles et al., 1989). There is no agreement, however, about the change
in the level of global self-concept in the adolescence stage. Trzesniewski et al.
(2003), Robins et al. (2002) claim that self-esteem decreases further. The reasons
for it may be pubertal changes, moving on to secondary schools (new social con-
text) and cognitive maturation. In many educational systems early teenagers
commence education in middle schools, which may be associated with separating
with childhood. They meet new teachers and have to adapt to a new environment,
1.4 Self-esteem Development Across the Life Span 29
which involves building their image and position in the group. Besides, they face
the challenges of new school subjects and reinforce the awareness of their academic
potentials and setbacks. Before they reach the end of secondary education, they
have to take important exams and develop a fairly clear view of the areas that they
will be ready to specialize in view of their future career. Such vital decisions may
well be accompanied by increased tension and distortions in self-views. Being
admitted to a college often means starting a more independent life, in many cases
away from home, in a larger academic centre. Those who do not continue education
in institutions of higher education are not free of tensions, either, as they have to
make the informed decisions, undergo the stress related to job hunt and recruitment
procedures. Doubtless, the changes and transitions that occur in adolescence and at
the onset of adulthood involve a risk of destabilizing the psychological functioning
of a student and may become a threat to self-esteem. Additionally, the challenges of
growth (including hormonal changes) and maturation become more complex,
which is likely to make young people feel relatively more uncertain. It is adoles-
cents that are the most affected by anxiety or eating disorders (Kelsey & Simons,
2014). Adolescents are also deeply affected by others’ judgements and social
comparisons. People who have supportive social relationships enjoy benefits such
as coping, ambitious goal setting, better academic adjustment. Meanwhile, their
excessive self-consciousness may lower their sense of self-worth (De Fraine, Van
Damme, & Onghena, 2006).
Quite contrariwise, Young and Mroczek (2003) postulate no significant change
at this stage. Cole et al. (2001), Erol and Orth (2011), in turn, flatly contradict the
earlier claims and indicate that self-esteem increases at puberty. According to Erol
and Orth (2011), self-esteem changes more rapidly than in adult life, which implies
that any interventions directed at improving the sense of self-worth might produce
best possible results during this period.
When one assumes the multidimensional approach to the construct, its fluctua-
tions related to age may become more complex. With growing life experience,
domain-specific self-esteem (self-concept) becomes more differentiated, reaching a
differentiation plateau around the beginning of adolescence. Marsh (1989) puts
forward a view that self-concepts generally decline in adolescent years. Marsh and
Ayotte (2003) specify that the largest declines occur in Reading, Math, Physical,
Appearance and Social self-concepts. Additionally, with advancing age, closely
linked areas of self-concept become more highly integrated and disparate areas
become increasingly differentiated. The accumulation of cognitive experience and
life experience, in general lets an individual recognize their strengths and weak-
nesses more clearly and value themselves according to performance in different
domains.
1.4.3 Adulthood
Adult life has been found to be the period of gradual increases in self-esteem.
Young adults have lower self-esteem than middle-aged adults or late adults
(Galambos, Barker, & Krahn, 2006; Helson & Wink, 1992 in Orth, Trzesniewski,
& Robins, 2010). The largest increase occurs in young adulthood. As Orth et al.
(2010) explain, midlife can generally be described as the time of relative stability in
family life, romantic relationships, work, etc. For many people it is the stage of life
in which they experience peaks in achievement and control over themselves and
their environment. Crocker and Wolfe (2001) argue that healthy adult development
means looking for internal sources of self-esteem rather than being constantly in
need of external reinforcement.
1.4.4 Old Age
The onset of old age is a critical point in the trajectory of self-esteem. Trzesniewski
et al. (2003) posit that there is a notable decline between the 60s and 80s. There
may be several reasons for the change, such as health problems, deteriorating
socioeconomic status, death of the spouse and less spectacular achievement after
retirement.
In general, the graphic representation of global self-acceptance between child-
hood and old age is in a curvilinear shape (Orth et al., 2010). Researchers agree
about the high level in early and middle years of life and two critical points. The
first one—an increase, is observable in young adulthood, and the other one—a
decline, happens about the age of 60. There is no unanimity about teenage years,
possibly due to gender differences in the sense of self-worth, which are rather
conspicuous at this stage. From the multidimensional point of view, the relations
between different self-concepts decline with age, which means that multidimen-
sionality tends to increase.
1.5 Self-esteem and Gender
The impact of gender on self-beliefs evokes a lot of scholarly interest. According to

Teoh & Nur Afiqah (2010), gender does not have an impact on self-esteem.
However, there are numerous counterclaims, e.g. female self-esteem is argued to be
slightly lower than male (Harper & Marshall, 1991; Harter, 1993; Sullivan, 2009).
The largest difference emerges in late adolescence (Kling, Hyde, Showers, &
Buswell, 1999; Pipher, 1994). In order to understand the reasons for it one must
view self-esteem from the multidimensional perspective. For teenage boys and girls
the global self-worth may be related to different self-concept domains (De Fraine,
1.5 Self-esteem and Gender 31
Van Damme, & Onghena, 2006). Gentile, Grabe, Dolan-Pascoe, Twenge, Wells,
and Maitino (2009) indicate gender differences in several specific domains. Males
feel better about their physical appearance, athletic skills, emotional stability and
self-satisfaction, while women feel better in the areas of behavioural conduct,
spirituality and honesty-trustworthiness that represent the moral-ethical sphere.
Knox, Funk, Elliott, and Bush (1998) propose that adolescent girls’ self-esteem
may be derived from perceived success in domains such as interpersonal func-
tioning, while boys self-esteem may be more contingent on perceived success in
other domains, such as athletic functioning or personal achievement. The claims are
consistent with the claim made by James (1890) that self-esteem depends on suc-
cess in areas that are important to an individual.
As all the theories presented above refer to people from Western cultures, certain
implications concerning traditionally valued traits may be considered. Over the
centuries the independent, achievement-oriented model of self has been the ideal,
whereas the more feminine orientation towards congeniality and sociability has
been less valued by American culture (Knox et al., 1998). The differential social-
ization processes and gender-role intensification may be an important explanation
of the lower measures of women’s self-esteem. Sex differences have also been
noticed in perceived competence in varied domains of academic functioning.
Self-concept of adolescent males is strongly related to mathematics, while for
females it is linked with verbal skills (Harter, 1999; Marsh, 1989 in Manning, Bear,
& Minke, 2006).
1.6 Self-esteem and Culture
A broad range of studies on self-esteem have adopted the approach to the construct
that can be labeled as universally applicable. Nonetheless, the contribution made by
Gore and Cross (2011), Marcus and Kitayama (1991), undermine the legitimacy of
such generality. As they demonstrate in their theoretical model, the sense of
self-worth is strongly dependent on culture. What is more, self-esteem is not an
ideal identifiable in all cultures. Akande (2008) advocates distinguishing between
emic (culturally-specific) and etic (universal or generalizable), approaches to
self-definition.
1.6.1 The Individualist and Collectivist Cultural Context
The understandings of self-esteem in East Asian countries are not the same as in the
Western European or North American world. The reason for it is lies in the fact that
culture is characterized by different value systems which representatives of the two
distinct worlds are raised to respect. The Western world promotes individualism,
which accentuates self-reliance and individual achievement, autonomy and inde-

pendence. People tend to view the attainment of their personal goals as a matter of
primary importance; they take pride in their uniqueness and engage in
self-enhancement strategies (by presenting themselves as superior to others) (Tsai,
Ying, & Lee, 2001). An individualist society instigates self-realization, i.e. ‘the
translation of each person’s unique set of talents and potentials into actuality is the
highest purpose to which one can devote one’s life’ (Akande, 2008, p. 595).
The East Asian cultures are associated with collectivism, in which the emphasis
is on group membership and social-oriented achievement. People regard themselves
as inseparably connected with others, interdependent and responsible for other
members of society. The philosophical background of collectivism is related to
Confucianism, a philosophy which views hierarchical, collectivistic culture, with
primacy of the group as ideal.
Heine, Lehman, Markus, and Kitayama (in Tsai et al., 2001) propound that
members of collectivistic cultures vary from their individualistic counterparts in the
degree of importance which they attach to positive self-regard. They preserve
personal relationships through self-effacement strategies, i.e. the avoidance of
attracting attention to oneself or even presenting oneself as inferior to others. They
demonstrate harsher attitudes towards personal failure and they are less likely to use
self-enhancement strategies (Tafarodi & Walters, 1999). Thereupon, their reported
self-esteem tends to be lower than that of North Americans or Western Europeans.
Likewise, Asian Americans often reveal lower reported self-esteem than White
Americans (Crocker & Lawrence, 1999; Mintz & Kashubeck in Tsai et al., 2001).
For instance, the mean scores on self-esteem in Japan are between one and two
standard deviation units lower than in Canada, which is a representative of indi-
vidualistic culture (Campbell et al. in Schmitt & Alik, 2005). Interestingly, though,
positive self-evaluations increase among Japanese people if they are intensively
exposed to American culture. What is more, Schmitt and Alik (2005) notice that
people from collectivist cultures tend to avoid extreme ends of self-esteem scales,
they manifest rather neutral response tendencies. Heine Lehman, Markus and
Kitayama (in Tsai et al., 2001) argue that in western cultures self-esteem or
self-concept play a central role, while in the Asian cultures they may be considered
as of minor importance. For the westerners, it is crucial to maintain a positive view
of oneself and strive to defend it by affirmation if self-esteem is under threat. The
main source that self-esteem stems from is the individual achievement. The
members of the Asian cultures ‘seek to identify inconsistencies between what is
ideally required of them and what they perceive themselves to be and attempt to
improve where they are lacking’ (Ahmed & Bruinsma, 2006, p. 560). The emphasis
is put on not falling behind others, rather than on surpassing them. Self-esteem in
these circumstances is propelled by the achievement of collective aims and may be
conceptualized in terms of group membership. Lim and Chang (2009) claim that
collective self-esteem encourages the positive feeling of one’s social identity. In
consonance with social identity theory, belonging to a social group is one of the
fundamental human needs and is moderately related to one’s self-image and social
1.6 Self-esteem and Culture 33
behaviours. For instance, self-esteem that an individual derives from ethnic group
membership can exert an impact on his/her personal feeling of self-worth.
There is unanimity among researchers that people’s self-beliefs tend to be more
stable in Western European and North American contexts, with self-esteem being a
trait rather than a state. In East Asian culture, self-evaluations are more likely to
fluctuate, which may be due to the philosophical view of the world as continually
changing. Another explanation for the malleability of self-esteem may be that East
Asians, as members of collectivist societies, are more sensitive to other people’s
views of them and they create self-conceptions that are flexible and
situation-specific (Gore & Cross, 2011). By contrast with Tafarodi and Walter’s
(1999) claim concerning the culturally contingent nature of self-esteem, Schmitt
and Alik (2005) make an observation that self-esteem is largely equivalent across
nations. As mentioned before, within individualistic cultures there is more internal
variation, while the collectivistic ones represent a more unified structure of
self-esteem. The researchers conclude that, generally, positive self-evaluations are
transcultural. Maintaining a positive self-image appears to be a natural human
motivation. It is almost “biological”, not an invention of Western or any other
culture (Branden, 1995).
Branden (1995), who adopts the term ‘tribalist mentality’ to refer to collectivist
perspective, posits that looking to others in search of fulfillment or happiness means
relinquishing control over our life. Self-responsibility and the willingness to be
accountable give rise to higher, more robust self-esteem. When it comes to team-
work, a self-responsible person is bound to cooperate successfully with others,
because of his or her need to be accountable. By acting in concert with others, one
carries the load of self-responsibility. Contrarily, if a culture suppresses the self, it
hinders creativity, individuality and initiative. If relationships are valued more than
authenticity, it may result in the individual’ s self-alienation, which is unsupportive
of self-esteem.
1.6.2 Meritocratic and Ego-Protective Educational Culture
Another typology of cultural models that are relevant in the context of self-esteem
has been introduced by a team of German researchers—Trautwein et al. (2006).
Their focal point of interest is educational culture and a comparison of two types of
learning environments that may have an influence on self-esteem. One of the pillars
of their theory is the distinction between meritocratic and ego-protective culture.
The former, prevalent in East Germany before the unification, is characterized by
two features. It asserts the importance of achievement and places a great value on
effort as a means to academic accomplishment. Moreover, the merits of a student
(his or her achievement and effort) are visible to classmates in meritocratic learning
environments; ‘social comparisons are used systematically and openly (…) to
heighten students’ motivation to excel’ (p. 337). A lot of importance is attached to
achievement, the effort that it involves and social comparisons. The other type of
learning environment, dominant in West Germany, is characterized by a lesser

emphasis on academic success. The feedback on performance is given in private
rather than in public (in class). A student’s effort is not regarded as central to
success or failure as there are many other factors contributing to it, such as luck, the
difficulty of a task, etc. In the meritocratic model, in which achievement is highly
valued, academic achievement becomes an important part of an individual’s
self-belief and academic self-concept is more likely to affect global self-esteem
because success is seen as resulting from the student’s own effort rather than from
some external sources. In the ego-protective learning environment, the fostering of
highly differentiated self-evaluations does not take place, and a student’s individual
needs rather than invested efforts are given weight to. Thereby, the academic
achievement does not exert an outstanding influence on global self-esteem. The
importance of social comparisons and one’s commitment to take the best possible
position in a group ranking make the meritocratic model noticeably similar to the
collectivist culture. It is worth mentioning, that East Germany used to be a com-
munist country (classified as collectivist), which makes this parallel even more
convincing. The ego-protective model, characterized by greater sensitivity to a
student’s individual progress and less importance given to objectively measurable
achievement bears a certain degree of similarity to the individualistic culture
described above.
1.6.3 The Position of Poland Along

the Individualist-Collectivist Continuum
In Polish culture, there is a balance between the collectivistic and individualistic

elements with a certain degree of bias towards the latter (Żakowska, 2007). The
polarity stems from specific religious and historical circumstances. The Roman
Catholic religion, with overtly collectivist perspective of man’s relations with
others, highlights the importance of family bonds and interpersonal contacts.
Besides, the values such as fairness, respect towards and equality with others are the
tenets of the catholic morality (ibid). Other than that, the communist regime the
country was under for more than forty years is viewed as one of the major factors
that account for the dominance of the collectivist model. That is when the ideas of
social interdependence, equality of the members of the society, shared responsi-
bility for the prosperity of the country were ingrained in the minds of Polish citizens
(ibid). However, when Poland commenced major political and economic reform at
the turn of 1980s and 1990s, the shift towards more individualistic tendencies
became observable. Even under the Soviet collectivistic regime, Poland stood
between the East and the West, and perceived its role as transmitting western ideas
to the eastern neighbours. Interestingly, Hoefstede’s Individualism Index proves
that nowadays Poland represents more of the individualist model, having scored 60
1.6 Self-esteem and Culture 35
points on a scale between 0 (non individualistic) and 100 (entirely individualistic),

but stays close to the midpoint on the scale (www.geert-hoefstede.com/Poland/).
In the context of self-esteem considerations, one cannot expect any predictable
tendencies because the society is a conglomerate of both systems. Schmitt and Alik
(2005), the authors of a cross-culture study of self-esteem level in 53 nations, reveal
that Poland scores the value of 30.34 on the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (RSES),
with the mean value of 30.85 (Standard Deviation = 4.47). The RSES consists of
10 items that assess a person’ self-evaluation of his or her worthiness as a human
being. Responses are coded on a 4-point scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to
4 (strongly agree). There are five positively and five negatively worded items. The
result that Poland obtains can be regarded as slightly above average, which places
the country nearer the individualist end of the scale. By comparison, participants
from the USA obtain one of the highest scores, i.e. 32.21, while participants from
Japan score 25.50, which is the lowest value in the study. The extreme values
confirm the claims by Markus and Kitayama concerning Western and Eastern
culture and their promoting or undermining effect on self-esteem (ibid). In the light
of the above considerations, it can be presumed that ‘Polish self-esteem’ is derived
more from individual achievement than from the membership in a group. Its holders
are likely to be focused on individual rights, and self-improvement, as well as
develop a sense of personal agency more than the need for reciprocity. It can be
expected that the individual efforts are more conducive to enhanced wellbeing than
the collectivist avoidance of self-focus.
1.6.4 Global and Ethnic Self-esteem
There is also a body of literature on self-esteem of social or racial minority groups.

Verkuyten & Thijs (2004) use the term ethnic self-esteem to refer to the way an
individual feels about being a member of a specific ethnic or racial group and they
assume that it contributes to global self-esteem. Their study, conducted on three
minority groups in the Netherlands (Turks, Moroccans and the Surinamese), show
that the subjects score higher in ethnic self-esteem tests than the members of the
social majority.
What seems quite a notable observation is that global self-esteem of African
Americans (Gray-Little & Hafdahl, 2000; Twenge & Crocker, 2002) and Hispanics
(Porter & Washington, 1993) in the USA (both populations represent minority
groups) is not lower than that of the Whites. Schmader, Major, and Gramzow
(2001) posit that the groups adopt a strategy of psychological disengagement,
which is a defensive detachment of self-esteem from a person’s outcomes in a
domain so that self-esteem is not contingent on the occurrence of successes and
failures in that domain. In simple words, they place little value on it. In this way, an
ethnic minority member can maintain intact levels of self-esteem in spite of the
information which proves their inferiority in the domain. Steele (in Schmader et al.,
2001) claims that members of minority groups tend to disengage from the academic
domain in order to avoid the stress that accompanies performing in the face of
cultural stereotypes of inferiority. There is evidence that the correlation between
academic performance and self-esteem is weak among some ethnic-minority stu-
dents—African Americans and Latinos (Osborne in Schmader et al., 2001). The
process of disengagement is based on discounting the validity of evaluation—
distrusting the results of it. In the educational context, members of socially stig-
matized groups perceive their exam or test scores as inaccurate and biased. They
blame the system rather than themselves for poor academic achievement, feeling
that they have an unfair racial disadvantage.
1.7 The Role of Self-esteem
The value of self-esteem for human functioning has been an important area of
research because of its consequences for the state of mental and bodily well-being,
social experience, academic achievement and even appearance.
1.7.1 Self-esteem and Psychological Functioning
There is a popular belief, acknowledged and verified by scholars, that people with
high self-esteem enjoy certain benefits of holding themselves in high regard. They
are characterized by positive affect, that is positive feelings about themselves and
the sense of happiness (Pelham & Swann, 1989). They accept and respect their
personal opinions. If feelings of anxiety or insecurity appear, they do not feel
intimidated or overwhelmed by them as much as people low in self-esteem do.
Healthy self-esteem involves harmonious operation of one’s true self in daily
functioning, which Kernis (2003), Vonk and Smit (2011) call authenticity. It is
characterized by awareness of one’s strengths and weaknesses, understanding one’s
needs, feelings and values, and not ignoring or distorting this self-knowledge. Quite
the contrary, authenticity means acceptance of one’s merits and vices, and pro-
cessing the self-related information objectively. It also means acting in accordance
with one’s values, not merely to gain the acceptance of others or avoid unpleasant
consequences. Being authentic means being genuine in relationships with close
people.
Another correlate of self-esteem is creativity, which Branden (1995) explains as
valuing thoughts and productions of one’s mind. High-esteem individuals are more
capable of coming up with innovative solutions as they possess the necessary
courage to express their personal convictions and face reactions that may be
adverse. They trust their judgements markedly more than people low in self-esteem,
who tend to be apprehensive about expressing unusual ideas (Coopersmith, 1967).
High self-esteem helps them to manage change and fosters experimentation, which
may even lead to early sexual activity or binge drinking (Baumeister et al., 2003).
1.7 The Role of Self-esteem 37
Close to creativity is another attribute of high self-esteem persons, namely in-

dependence. It refers to the readiness to take full responsibility for one’s deeds and
beliefs and refuse to conform when others are wrong. Independence gives an
individual enough strength to resist social pressure and endure possible ostracism
that may result from dissenting the mainstream (Baumeister et al., 2003). People
who keep themselves in low regard are more easily threatened and find it harder to
deal with threats. They lack confidence in the ability to face the events that they are
confronted with (Coopersmith, 1967). On the other hand, high self-esteem indi-
viduals are considered as less likeable after ego threat—they may become arrogant,
uncooperative, rude, and unfriendly (Vohs & Heatherton, 2006).
High self-esteem facilitates persistence after failure (Fila-Jankowska, 2009).
People who have positive feelings of self-worth are more likely to bounce back
when they have gone through some traumatic experience. This claim is also known
as a buffer hypothesis, because high self-esteem acts as a buffer against misfortune
or stressing circumstances (Orth, Robin, & Meier, 2009). It may be protective
against depression and physical illnesses, and thus account for longevity. It is
unstable self-esteem that has been found to correlate with depressive symptoms and
weaker health, while low self-esteem is a risk factor in bulimia (Roberts & Monroe
in Baumeister et al., 2003).
People with high self-esteem maintain more positive social relationships. For
instance, they find it easier to form friendships (Coopersmith, 1967), give and
receive expressions of affection or appreciation (Branden, 1995). They also enjoy a
relative ease with assertive behaviour in themselves and others. High self-esteem
predisposes people to speak up and to take initiative in a group. They are likely to
show greater bias in favour of their own groups, which may give rise to discrim-
ination of out-group members. Oddly enough, pupils with high self-esteem are
characterized by both pro-social and anti-social behaviours—they are likely to bully
others, but they are also ready to stand up for the victims of bullying
(Fila-Jankowska, 2009). People with high sense of self-worth often regard them-
selves as popular and socially attractive, but external measures of their social
attributes (such as interviewing others about them), do not necessarily confirm these
convictions. The exceptional social skills and successes may exist mainly in their
minds.
Feeling superior to others, holding a grandiose view of oneself and belief that
one deserves special privileges is evidence of inflated self-esteem, also referred to
as narcissism (Baumeister et al., 2003). Other negative expression of high
self-esteem that its holders may reveal is the aggressive response to rejection or
disrespect, for example, excessive self-enhancement, derogating others and
“clinging to their own self-serving representations of events, producing conflict
with, (…) interpretations of their friends, spouses, or colleagues” (Vonk & Smit,
2011, p. 3). As Vohs and Heatherton (2001) observe, high self-esteem people seek
the satisfaction of the self by emphasizing their own performance and accom-
plishments, and desire self-affirming feedback. Low self-esteem people emphasize
their affiliations with others, satisfying their primary belongingness needs.
The level of self-esteem is reflected in facial expression, way of looking, moving

and talking. People with high self-esteem are characterized by harmony between
what they say and how they look or sound. “We see eyes that are alert, bright and
lively; a face that is relaxed and (barring illness) tends to exhibit natural color and
good skin vibrancy; a chin that is held naturally and in alignment with one’s body;
and a relaxed jaw” (Branden, 1995, p. 44). The high self-esteem holder maintains
natural eye contact with an interlocutor. The shoulders are relaxed but not slouched,
the arms hang in a natural way. The general posture makes a natural impression,
free of tension. The tone of voice is appropriate to the situation and the pronun-
ciation is clear. The speed of speaking does not place strain on the listener (ibid).
1.8 Self-esteem and Learning
The relationship between self-esteem and learning has been under research for a
few decades as it seems to be vital for answering the question whether any planned
intervention to raise a learner’s feeling of self-worth may lead to improving school
performance and academic achievement. Baumeister et al. (2003) state that
self-esteem and school performance are modestly correlated, which means that high
self-esteem does not necessarily lead to high academic results. Thereby, attempts at
boosting self-esteem are not likely to result in better grades. Baumeister et al.,
however, address only the global and state feelings of self-worth, and do not make
any allowances for its specific facets.
Assuming a multidimensional approach towards the construct has led to the pro-
liferation of studies that proved interrelationships between self-esteem and its various
behavioural outcomes, including academic performance (Saebi, 2011). Rosenberg
et al. (1995) acknowledge that global self-esteem is mediated by domain-specific
self-esteem (a bottom-up process), while specific self-esteem is correlated with aca-
demic achievement, and the latter two are mutually reinforcing constructs (Marsh &
Craven, 2006). Enhancing specific self-esteem causes higher achievement, and higher
achievement improves domain-specific self-esteem. Teachers should simultaneously
work on strengthening students’ academic self-beliefs and achievement, otherwise
the results will not be permanent (i.e., improving students’ self-concept without
improving achievement will not lead to lasting results and vice versa). The mutual
effects are strongest when self-belief matches the achievement construct as far as the
domain is concerned, for instance achievement in mathematics and mathematics
self-esteem. In line with the claim, subject-specific self-esteem also predicts
achievement in language (Chen, Yeh, Hwang, & Lin, 2013; Pepi, Faria, & Alesi,
2006; Sanchez & Roda, 2003). Unsurprisingly, non-academic self-beliefs do not
correlate with school achievement (ibid).
The interdependence between self-beliefs and academic achievement can be
explained by making references to self-efficacy, which is closely related to specific
self-esteem (Rosenberg et al. 1995). Self-efficacy, according to Bandura (in
Rosenberg et al.), determines how much effort an individual invests in performance
1.8 Self-esteem and Learning 39
and how long s/he will persist when difficulties appear. Low self-efficacy people,
when confronted with obstacles, weaken their efforts or abandon trying, while their
high self-efficacy counterparts intensify their efforts to deal with the challenge.
Possessing comparable levels of ability with low self-efficacy holders, high-efficacy
people may achieve more satisfying outcomes.
The extent to which domain-specific self-esteem influences the global feeling of
self-worth depends on the centrality of the particular domain in the person’s
self-beliefs. According to Crocker and Wolfe’s (2001) theory of contingent
self-esteem, global self-esteem depends on success or failure in the domains which
are personally valued. The extent to which academic self-esteem affects global
self-esteem is a function of how much academic performance is valued by an
individual. Across the lifespan, educational achievement tends to become less
central for self-esteem as people turn twenty, and it is more noticeable in male
young men (O’Malley & Bachman, 1979). Cheung (1986) confirms that females
are less sensitive to the effect of academic achievement on self-esteem, and they are
more likely to devaluate school work in the event of failure. The devaluation, or
disengagement, as Crocker and Wolfe (2001) call it, is a self-protective mechanism,
activated when self-esteem is threatened. School experiences such as overall school
climate and the feedback from teachers are important factors in the context of
students’ global self-esteem. Grades and student ratings of teachers have a signif-
icant impact on self-esteem in specific subjects, for example science, mathematics
and physical education (but not in a language) (Hoge et al., 1990). Rosenberg et al.
(1995) claim that school grades produce an effect also on global self-esteem.
Conversely, specific academic self-esteem has a measurable effect on grades,
whereas global self-esteem does not.
Additionally, academic achievement is correlated with stability of self-esteem.
Kugle, Clements, and Powell (1983) explain that students with less stable
self-esteem are less task-oriented, and more preoccupied with their status in the eyes
of others. This kind of self-oriented attitude automatically diminishes the impor-
tance of task achievement. On the other hand, extreme stability of self-esteem may
result in the inability to respond and adapt to changes in one’s environment, and
thus may block personal growth. The optimal level of self-esteem stability for
harmonious personal development is not too high, which resonates with Vonk and
Smit’s claim (2011) that optimal self-esteem is contingent. Only when one feels a
mild degree of temporary dissatisfaction with the self, are they stimulated to face
new challenges and pursue their ambitions.
The interconnections between learning and different dimensions of self-esteem
presented above are largely explicable in terms of features of general functioning
that correlate with the level of self-esteem. For instance positive affect, also known
as a sense of well-being, is likely to cause enthusiasm as well as willingness to
explore the unknown and accomplish tasks. Positive emotions, such as interest and
curiosity enhance achievement because interested students (who take pride in their
work) are probably naturally motivated to pursue their aims (Valiente, Swanson, &
Eisenberg, 2012).
1.9 Self-esteem and Language Learning
Language learning is a genuinely ego-involving experience and requires the degree

of personal engagement incomparable to other areas of study (Piechurska-Kuciel,
2008). Language is a part of one’s identity and serves the purpose of expressing the
identity to the environment. The task is bound to evoke strong affective reactions,
particularly when the tool for communication does not allow its inadvanced user to
express him/herself adequately and accurately. Foreign language learning also
means engaging with other cultures ‘which may embrace different understanding of
self-related values and qualities’ (Mercer, 2011, p. 23).
The role of self-esteem in Foreign language Learning (FLL) has been the focus
of only a limited number of studies although several facets of the process are,
beyond any doubt, related to the construct (Yazdanmehr, 2011). Self-perception
noticeably affects attitudes, behaviours, evaluations, and cognitive processes
(McCroskey et al. in Rubio, 2007). All these aspects are involved in language
learning—attitudes account for the investment of effort; behaviours, that largely
result from attitudes, are instances of use; evaluations are the source of feedback
and trigger self-reflection; cognitive processes are the essential part of the learning
process. Learners with sound self-esteem hold positive beliefs about themselves and
their learning potential, reveal commitment and responsibility (Arnold in Rubio,
2007).
Learning a foreign language is, in most cases, an interactive experience that
entails communication, cooperative effort to learn and overcome difficulties. As
Casal (in Rubio, 2007) posits, the process involves constructing a new social
identity of a member of a given group. Part of the information one collects to
evaluate one’s self is derived from group membership and a sense of belonging.
Additionally, a foreign language classroom becomes an environment where col-
lective self-esteem is enhanced. The feelings or beliefs regarding the group one
belongs to contribute to collective self-esteem. Personal and collective self-esteem
are mutually supportive—personal self-esteem is enhanced when collective
self-esteem increases. However, when the collective task results in failure, group
members may put the blame on other members of the group and thus protect their
own self-esteem. Group members tend to stay in a group as long as the group
satisfies their need to boost the positive aspects of their identity. When the group
ceases to do it, they may choose to abandon the group (ibid).
It is accepted that the relation between self-esteem and FLL should be investi-
gated from a domain-specific perspective. It has been proved that learner’s
self-concept in one language is not necessarily indicative of his/her self-concept in
another language (Mercer, 2011). According to Crocker and Wolfe (2001), James
(in Coopersmith, 1967), Vonk and Smit (2011), people’s self-esteem is sensitive to
the outcomes in domains which are important to them. If proficiency in English or
any other foreign language is a contingency of self-worth for a learner, the success
or failure in learning the language is likely to affect their self-view.
1.9 Self-esteem and Language Learning 41
As implied earlier, self-esteem may impact upon a learner’s attitudes, embodied

by motivation, whose importance for academic achievement is crucial. More
specifically, contingent self-esteem is likely to have motivational power—its
enhancement may be an important personal motive of a language learner whose
sense of self-worthiness is conditioned by outcomes in language learning. High
achievement in L2 helps some people feel good about themselves, while low
achievement impairs their self-liking. People seek to feel pleased with themselves,
and they choose to do things that make them feel pleased and not to do things that
make them feel displeased. Therefore, “the amount of effort expended in the pursuit
of proficiency might be related to the degree to which their self-esteem is invested
in the domain of English proficiency” (Brown, 2007, p. 19). In the occurrence of
low achievement they will try to put their self-esteem right by working harder
towards better outcomes or redefine their contingencies and diminish the impor-
tance of failure for their self-esteem. The latter type of solution has been referred to
by Vonk and Smit (2011) as disengagement.
Some subcomponents of motivation in the context of language learning are quite
closely related to the concept of self. The two traditional orientations, i.e. inte-
grative and instrumental (Gardner in Brown, 2007), contribute to the image of a
learner’s ideal self defined by Higgins (in Dörnyei, 2009) as representation of the
attributes that an individual would like to possess. Both integrative motivation,
viewed as openness to assume characteristic features (language and culture) of
another community and instrumental motivation referring to utilitarian benefits
drawn from language learning, have the self-promotion and self-guide focus. Both
types of motivation involve the need to bridge the gap between one’s actual self and
the projected ideal self. The construction of the ideal self achieving the desired goal
helps a learner to transform the goal into concrete actions (ibid). The pursuit of the
ideal L2 Self, which is the L2-specific dimension of the ideal self, motivates the
learner to become someone who is a competent user of L2 (Hood & Tobutt, 2009).
A learner’s beliefs, relevant to cognitive processing, may also be perceived as
tenets of positive self-image. They are ‘general assumptions that students hold
about themselves as learners, about factors influencing learning, and about the
nature of learning and teaching’ (Victori & Lockhart in Piechurska-Kuciel, 2008,
p. 68). They are formed through social interactions, educational past and personal
influences. A learner’s beliefs about self (for example how efficient he is in
learning), are expressions of his confidence in L2 abilities and perceived
self-efficacy (Manzanaresis & Murphy, 2010). Supportive and positive beliefs, for
instance: ‘I have got a good ear for languages’, help to overcome difficulties and
enhance motivation, while negative or unrealistic beliefs (cf. ‘Anybody should learn
a language in two years’, ‘I’ll never learn to speak fluently’, etc.) can result in
anxiety, frustration and decreased motivation. Learners who believe that they do not
possess necessary skills will avoid tasks which require those skills (Bernat &
Gvozdenko, 2005). Learner negative beliefs about self, which reflect his low
self-concept and low self-efficacy make it more difficult to perform at their best, as
“energy is split between the task and an excessive concern with a belief about lack
of ability or worth (…). There is less energy for the task at hand and the negative
feelings make the learning experience unpleasant, (…) and thus less effective”
(Arnold, 2007, p. 15). Beliefs act as perceptual filters—if a learner maintains a
belief that he cannot learn a language, he probably cannot unless he changes his
belief (Rubio, 2007). Beliefs interfere with a student’s cognitive performance in
language processing, correlate with strategy use, autonomy and general L2
achievement (Wenden in Gabillon, 2005), so they can be considered as predictors
of success in learning.
Another important variable in L2 learning which is correlated with self-esteem is
language anxiety defined as ‘the unique feelings of tension and apprehension
experienced in SLA process in the classroom context, arising from the necessity to
learn and use a FL that has not been fully mastered’ (Piechurska-Kuciel, 2008,
p. 59). The language learner possesses the skills of communicating in L1 and may
feel intimidated by having to render an equally wide range of personally important
meanings through a largely unfamiliar medium that L2 is. The quality and
authenticity of self-presentation is perceived by the learner as far from being perfect
and the “disparity between the true self as known to the language learner and the
more limited self” is a source of anxiety, different from any other academic anxiety
(Horwitz 1995, p. 574). Oral communication is particularly prone to the harmful
effects of anxiety which is called communication apprehension—‘the fear of real or
anticipated communication outcomes’ (Piechurska-Kuciel, 2008, p. 62). It may
account for avoidance of direct interaction, and is juxtaposed with willingness to
communicate (WTC). According to Mercer and Williams (2014), if a person has
low self-esteem s/he will be less willing to communicate as s/he is anxious about
having little of value to offer. Spoken performance involves one more social factor
conducive to anxiety, i.e. fear of negative evaluation. Speaking in the foreign
language means being judged by others—interlocutors, classmates, examiners,
audiences, etc. The awareness will be harder to handle for learners with low sense
of self-worth as those with high self-esteem can better cope with negative feedback,
and negative experience in general. People with a heightened level of fear of
evaluation are anxious about making mistakes and causing a negative impression
(Piechurska-Kuciel, 2008). The teacher’s expectation of flawless performance or
critical response may additionally strengthen the feeling of self-consciousness, and,
ultimately, further impair a learner’s self-esteem.
Another form of performance anxiety is test anxiety, experienced in an appar-
ently threatening situation that measurement of learner progress entails. It impairs
study habits, information retrieval during the test, and thereby ultimate test per-
formance (ibid). Students low in self-confidence are more prone to the pernicious
effects of an affective response such as test anxiety (Oxford in Piechurska-Kuciel,
2008). Excessively anxious learners have a decreased ability to tolerate ambiguity
that language learning involves (Arnold, 2007). Guessing meanings from contex-
tual clues, creative writing or speaking, etc. involve taking risks as the possibility of
making mistakes is increased, which causes discomfort. As a consequence, the
learner, intimidated by his anxiety, may perform worse or choose to minimize
interaction (Piechurska-Kuciel, 2008). Insufficient language practice inevitably
leads to falling behind the more self-confident risk takers in class, and finding
oneself in a vicious circle. Conversely, less anxious students are not debilitated by
inhibitions, which are learning blocks, or overpowering perfectionist boundaries
responsible for one’s sense of inadequacy.
Low self-esteem is one of the major factors responsible for activating language
anxiety, which, in turn, correlates with lower foreign language achievement and
negative attitude towards the language (Avila, 2007). It can be considered as a
predictor of all the detriment to performance described above. In general, the
feelings that learners have about their ability to manage a learning task are “ex-
pressions of their self-esteem and play a fundamental role motivating or hindering
the application of the necessary cognitive processes” (Heyde in Ortega, 2007,
p. 114).
In their socio-constructivist model Williams and Burden (in Ortega, 2007)
claimed that interpersonal relations in the classroom largely determine students’
perceived competence. Besides, classroom learning is always accompanied by
comparisons of self with others made by every student. Such comparisons exert an
important influence on an individual’s self-concept. It also needs to be mentioned
that an individual values himself as significant others regard and value him
(Coopersmith, 1967). Self-esteem is, to a certain degree, derived from others’
appraisal—the amount of respectful, accepting and concerned treatment that he
receives from significant others in his life. In a classroom context, the appraisal of
the teacher and classmates may be critical to the learner’s opinion of his worth. He
is likely to perceive himself as having the characteristics and values that the relevant
people attribute to him. For some it means a surge of motivation to study more, for
others developing the inferiority feelings and reducing the effort expended on
learning.
Language learning, which is a deeply ego-involving experience by nature, calls
for an active role on the part of a learner. Students who are emotionally involved
and responsible for their learning are more likely to become self-regulated (be-
haviourally, motivationally and metacognitively active) participants of the process,
which translates into practice as their are capability for transforming their mental
abilities into academic skills (Cubukcu, 2009; Zimmerman in Benson, 2001). Being
self-regulated is a prerequisite for developing an autonomous approach to learning.
Additionally, the profile of a self-regulated, autonomous learner comprises char-
acteristics such as positive self-views and a sound level of self-confidence on a par
with independence, academic curiosity and the ability to reflect. An autonomous
learner, often synonymous in the literature of the subject with “an ideal learner,”
enjoys “a robust sense of self that is unlikely to be undermined by any actual or
assumed negative assessments of themselves or their work” (Candy in Benson,
2001, p. 85). It is hardly feasible to be an autonomous learner without possessing
the characteristic of being self-efficacious, i.e. maintaining the beliefs about one’s
capability to learn a foreign language. The confidence in one’s own strength and
potential helps in achieving the desired outcomes and developing the feeling of
pride, which are the tenets of positive self-beliefs. It is worth mentioning here that
self-efficacy, inseparably interwoven with self-esteem, has been found to be posi-
tively correlated with the use of learning strategies across all levels of FL
proficiency (Mercer, 2011). So, to recapitulate, learner self-esteem, along with the
other self-related constructs, is mutually supportive with autonomy. It is extremely
hard to accept responsibility for self-regulated learning without holding a positive
self-view that propels an individual towards the pursuit of ambitious goals and
fortifies their motivation.
Considering the whole array of facets of language learning that depend on
learners’ self-beliefs, one can conclude that investigating self-esteem in SLA
context is worthwhile. Explicit work on the issue is rather scarce and many ques-
tions remain unresolved, yet some facts have been established. A number of
desirable good learner behaviours such as motivation, readiness for autonomy or
low anxiety are grounded in his/her sense of self—worth. The way the learner
perceives and values him/herself influences his/her learning behaviours, ambitions
and attitudes towards language learning (Mercer, 2011). Low self-esteem may
prevent a learner from risk-taking and result in abandoning the attempts to practice.
Fear of evaluation and reduced practice opportunities lead to lower achievement
and, as a consequence, lower motivation. Not only do self-beliefs direct the lear-
ner’s decisions and undertakings but also determine the way s/he interprets past
experience and sets him/herself goals for the future. Self-esteem presumably
assumes paramount importance in the domain of language learning also due to the
fact that the language is a medium of self-presentation and self-expression. One
may be tempted to think that more advanced learners will develop higher
self-esteem. Yet, this line of reasoning may prove faulty as growing competence of
a learner may be accompanied by his/her growing awareness of limitations in
language ability, for instance difficulty in expressing oneself adequately or being
oneself. More advanced learners are actually more likely to be sensitive to the
difference between their true identity and their limited L2 identity (Rubio, 2007).
A more thorough understanding of the possible link between language achievement
and the level of learner’s self-esteem may help interpret some of his/her behaviours,
approaches and motivations. Marsh and Craven (2006) posit that planned inter-
vention to enhance domain-specific self-esteem should result in higher achievement
in the respective domain, and vice versa—higher achievement should improve
domain-specific self-esteem. It is worth reminding that adolescence and young
adulthood, (that the participants of the study represent), are the stages of life when
self-esteem is quite likely to undergo fluctuations (see: Sect. 1.5). The heightened
self-focus is accompanied by rising desire for independence and autonomy. In the
Polish educational context, the rather tumultuous years concur with important
school transitions—from lower to upper secondary (to be replaced shortly with the
transition from primary to secondary schools under the new educational reform),
and next to higher schools. There are several factors that may put students at risk for
negative emotional and behavioral changes. For example, they need to make new
friends and integrate into a new, more complex social environment. They may
perceive the new educational settings as less nurturing, more competitive and more
demanding academically. Besides, they have to adapt to new assessment schemes,
more social comparisons. In the final years, the students have to take decisions
about the selection of the new school or college and about the classes or faculties
that will enhance their personal growth, expand the areas of special interest, and, in
the long-term perspective give them optimal employment prospects. Every student
has to take school-leaving exams, which are assessed by external marking boards,
which may cause additional stress. All the challenges and tensions, accompanied by
dynamic physical growth are likely to be responsible for turbulences self-esteem,
both in its global and academic facets, and, possibly, for a notable decrease in
academic achievement. In the context of the current book, it seems worth
reminding, that at each of the educational stages mentioned, Polish students take
exams in a foreign language (which in most cases is English). All things considered,
the understanding of the relation between specific self-esteem and attainment in
language learning seems to be a way of gaining a deeper insight into a range of
learners’ diverse motivations, beliefs, behaviours and goals.
The aim of the present chapter was to provide the theoretical background to the
construct of self-esteem and analyze its importance for different spheres of human
life, including learning. First the basic terminology was defined, with the main
emphasis on affective domain, cognitive domain and affective factors. The con-
ceptual shift in thinking placed a greater emphasis on the role of the latter in L2
learning. The subsequent section contained the inventory of affective factors
implicated in L2 learning, classified into those connected with the learner as an
individual and those viewing the learner a participant in socio-cultural transactions.
An overview of antecedents of self-esteem showed that early familial experience,
appraisals of significant others, the proportion of successes and failures, and, last
but not least, genetic influences account for the level and stability of self-esteem.
The further sections depicted different typologies of self-esteem that theorists and
researchers widely refer to. The central construct was compared to other self-related
ones in order to clarify its nature and highlight its distinctive features, as well as
explain the interdependence between the seemingly synonymous terms
(self-concept, self-efficacy). Self-esteem is the most affective of them and, similarly
to self-concept, has a hierarchical nature. Subsequently, the role of cultural back-
ground was explained, because it is a variable that determines whether self-esteem
is derived from the realization of collective or individual aims. The construct in
focus exerts tremendous influence on psychological functioning and the quality of
life. It is a prerequisite of well-being and mental health, a buffer against depression
and suicidal tendencies. In academic settings self-esteem, particularly its specific
dimension is related with achievement and perseverance in the face of failure. It
intertwines with a range of factors responsible for success in language learning. The
aim of Chap. 2 is to present a review of empirical research on self-esteem.
Chapter 2
A Review of Selected Empirical Research
on Self-esteem
The aim of the second chapter is to present the findings of selected empirical
research on self-esteem and its interaction with a range of learning-related factors. It
opens with several observations concerning various angles from which self-esteem,
as a variable responsible for a range of internal processes or social behaviours, can
be investigated. Research into self-esteem has confronted certain methodological
challenges due to the diversity of definitions and the hierarchical nature of the
construct. Thus, for the sake of clarity, the distinctions between different dimen-
sions of self-esteem and mutual influences between them are briefly reminded in the
initial parts of the chapter. The subsequent sections contain a concise explanation of
other researchers’ issues, such as objectivity of results (hazarded by a so called
“desirability effect”) and validity of measurement scales. The chapter is continued
with a review of the most popular methodological designs and techniques exploited
in self-esteem research, including self-report, introspection, case study, etc. What
follows is an inventory of the most frequently used measures of self-esteem for all
age groups, and a recommendation to combine quantitative and qualitative research
approaches leading to the most accountable results. The next section contains a
condensed report on the results of the exploration of the interplay between
self-esteem and different aspects of psychological functioning, relevant to language
learning, such as participation in social groups, creativity or antisocial behaviour.
Then, the findings concerning the correlation between self-beliefs and academic
achievement are presented. Ultimately, the chapter features an overview of
researches on the relationship between self-esteem from a multidimensional per-
spective and an array of aspects of SLA. The concluding part cites the recent
findings about the links between self-views and performance in a foreign language.

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-75283-9_2
48 2 A Review of Selected Empirical Research on Self-esteem
2.1 Assessing Self-esteem
Self-esteem has become a household word over the past few decades and intensive
research into the construct has revealed a lot about its complex nature. The major
approaches to it—a psychological and a sociological one have dealt with different
dimensions of the phenomenon, and provided complementary interpretations of its
role in human life. The psychological approach centres upon intrapsychic devel-
opmental processes, behaviours that are responsible for achieving success in vari-
ous spheres of life. In the sociological perspective, self-esteem is seen as an
interpsychic phenomenon which develops in a social context, which means that the
emphasis is put on the mutual reactions between an individual and others and the
consequences of these reactions for the development of self and the sense of worth
(Mruk, 2006). Different methodological paradigms that characterize the psycho-
logical and sociological approaches have produced a vast array of findings, some of
which had a direct bearing on educational policy.
The exploration of the construct, although robust, was not without misconcep-
tions and traps due to the diversity of definitions of the concept and not infrequent
applications of inappropriately selected measurement tools (Blascovich & Tomaka,
1991). Among the numerous self-esteem measuring instruments some scales cor-
relate rather poorly with one another (Heatherton & Wyland, 2003). The truth is
that self-esteem should be measured in a manner that corresponds with a specific
theory and definitions of the self (Gore & Cross, 2011). The most widely applied
definitions were reviewed in Sects. 1.3.1 and 1.3.2, and they are not going to be
reconsidered here, however, some factors important for measuring self-esteem in an
adequate and valid manner require clarifying.
One of the issues that needs to be taken into consideration by a self-esteem
researcher is the multidimensionality of the construct. Self-esteem, at its global
level, is the individual’s overall attitude toward the self (Coopersmith, 1967). It has
to be remembered, however, that there are also constituent parts of the self-attitude
that refer to specific facets of the self. Specific self-esteem is a better predictor of a
specific behaviour, while global self-esteem is associated with general well-being
(Rosenberg, Schooler, Schoenbach, & Rosenberg, 1995). Rosenberg et al. (1995),
whose contribution to the development of theory and research into self-esteem is
hard to overrate, and as such is worth mentioning, measured global self-esteem of
1886 American high school male students using 6 of 10 items of Rosenberg
Self-Esteem Scale (Rosenberg, 1965). The outcomes related with well-being were
such as depression, general anxiety, happiness, etc. Specific self-esteem was
measured with Bachman’ School Ability Self-Concept Index (Bachman, 1970),
which is based on subjects’ responses to three questions. The behavioural outcome,
which was used in the study was academic achievement, rendered by grade point
average. The results showed that global self-esteem was more strongly related to
most measures of psychological well-being than was specific self-esteem.
Conversely, specific behavioural outcomes were much more highly correlated with
specific self-esteem than with global self-esteem. The study proved that self-esteem
2.1 Assessing Self-esteem 49
is related to other variables but the appropriate type of self-esteem must be paired
with an appropriate outcome. The researchers also scrutinized the effects of global
and specific self-esteem on each other, only to find that specific self-esteem has a
stronger effect on global self-esteem than global self-esteem has on specific
self-esteem (a bottom-up relation). In the light of the above considerations, it must
be stated clearly that anybody who faces the task of measuring self-esteem should
choose whether they want to use an undimensional or multidimensional scale
depending on their working definition of the construct and the goals of the study.
Not all facets of domain-specific self-esteem exert an equal influence on global
self-esteem, though. Crocker and Wolfe (2001) claim that one’s overall self-worth
is mediated by self-regard in those domains on which their self-esteem is contin-
gent, i.e. domains in which perceived successes or failures are important for one’s
self-view. There are individual differences among people as far as contingencies on
which their self-esteem is based are concerned. Two most popular contingencies are
social approval and competencies. In Crocker and Wolfe’s study 1300 ethnically
diverse American college students were supposed to complete the Contingencies of
Self-Worth Scale designed by Crocker, Luhtanen, Cooper, and Bouvrette (2003).
The contingencies included in the study were: approval from others, appearance,
God’s love, family support, school competency, competition and virtue. The
researchers claimed that they had selected contingencies most frequently mentioned
in the literature of the subject. The statistical analysis proved that two
achievement-related factors, i.e. school competency and competition were highly
correlated, and, two factors related to regard from significant others, i.e. social
approval and appearance, were also highly correlated. Furthermore, the results
showed that basing self-esteem on external sources such as social approval or
appearance was strongly correlated with lower levels of self-esteem. Virtue, the
most internal of the contingencies according to the researchers, correlated signifi-
cantly with high self-esteem. Other interesting findings were that female students
obtained significantly higher scores than males on family support, appearance,
school competence, virtue and others’ approval contingencies. African Americans
chose God’s love as the most important contingency. Last but not least, as it has
been mentioned before, self-esteem was found to be more strongly related to
self-worth in the domains on which a person had staked their global self-regard
(Crocker & Wolfe, 2001).
2.2 Methodological Diversity in Self-esteem Studies
An overwhelming majority of self-esteem researches is based on some kind of

self-report (Gore & Cross, 2011; Mruk, 2006; Zeigler-Hill, 2010). The self-report
may take a reactive and spontaneous form. The former involves subjects locating
the self on one or more dimensions regarded as important by the researcher. In the
latter one, participants are supposed to answer a number of open-ended questions
about the self. Re-active self-reports enjoy more popularity as they are easier to
analyze statistically but spontaneous self-reports are viewed as higher in construct

validity, that is correspondence between the questions and the theory of self-esteem
advocated by the researcher.
With a self-report as the most common technique, the range of methodological
designs employed to investigate self-esteem is typical of the social sciences. The
research paradigms involve both qualitative approaches (for example case studies)
and quantitative approaches (for example experimental studies). In order to render
the variety of methods, Mruk (2006) organized them into a form of pyramid, with
the most objective (measurable) ones at the top of it, and the most subjective ones at
the bottom (Fig. 2.1).
Introspection, as the most subjective method, based on the perception of one’s
own experience, is not used as an independent self-esteem study method nowadays.
It is deemed to lack reliability and validity since there is a sample of only one
subject. However, it might be insightful as a supplementary method to be combined
with the more objective ones. It was used, for instance, in the study of self-regard
and self-enhancement conducted by Sedikides, Hornton, and Gregg (2007).
Similarly, a case study is not a method which gives results that can be easily
duplicated and generalized as it focuses on an individual case. However, it is
utilized in clinical settings when it is important to analyze variations from regular
patterns in psychological functioning of a patient with self-esteem problems
(Branden, 2001). Beyond medical context, a case study was used by Hunt (2011) in
her research on helping teenage girls to manage and improve their self-esteem. The
interview method has a certain advantage over the previous two because an inter-
view with a respondent can be structured to increase the reliability. Laboratory-
based observational methods were used by Coopersmith (1967) in order to observe
children. They provide rich information about the subjects but fail to explain cause
and effect or why something happens. Correlational methods, which are more
recent research solutions, rely on tests and surveys to gain an insight into an
Fig. 2.1 The traditional Reality

methodological pyramid of
self-esteem research (Mruk,
2006, p. 42) Experimental Method
Correlational Method
Lab Observation Method
Interview Method
Case Study Method
Introspective Method
2.2 Methodological Diversity in Self-esteem Studies 51
individuals’ self-esteem. They are widely used as they enable researchers to

establish correlations in different situations, for example in connection with per-
sonality characteristics, critical events or academic achievement. They also allow
for comparisons between high and low self-esteem and its correlates (Kernis, 2003).
Calculating correlations is a way to increase the objectivity of the research. The
difficulty (as it has been explained before) lies in selecting an adequate self-esteem
measure. The most objective method in the pyramid is experimental research which
requires pre- and post-experiment testing the self-esteem of subjects who are
engaged in an activity which results in success or a failure. The experimenter
controls the results and observes their effect on self-esteem. The method permits to
study causal links between self-esteem and attitudes or behavioural outcomes. Its
drawback is that it is time consuming, expensive and its generalizability beyond the
laboratory situation is questionable. Besides, as Epstein (1979) warns, investigating
emotionally significant phenomena in a laboratory is problematic in a practical and
ethical sense, and requires extremely careful preparation and performance. Instead,
he recommends studying self-esteem in so called natural laboratories where par-
ticipants report on their self-esteem experience immediately after some event or
after a period of time, in a manner structured by the researcher. Taking all the
strengths and weaknesses of the methods presented into consideration, Mruk (2006)
posits that an integrated approach to self-esteem research—combining qualitative
and quantitative approaches may well be the optimal solution that is most likely to
do justice to the complexity of the phenomenon.
2.2.1 The Most Popular Measures of Self-esteem
There are many measures of self-esteem that lend themselves to correlational or

experimental research but only some of them have been recognized as reliable and
valid. Blascovich and Tomaka (1991) listed the most important scales viewing the
construct undimensionally or multidimensionally, out of which the top five are
going to be briefly characterized below (not exactly in a chronological order but
according to popularity). These are: The Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (Rosenberg,
1965), The Coopersmith Inventory (Coopersmith, 1967), The Tennessee
Self-Concept Scale (Fitts & Roid, 1988), Piers-Harris Children’s Self-Concept
Scale (Piers, 1984) and Janis-Field Feelings of Inadequacy Scale (Janis & Field,
1959).
The most widely used measure is The Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (RSE;
Rosenberg, 1965). Its target population is adolescents and adults (the adaptation for
children designed by Rosenberg and Simmons in 1977 did not become so popular).
Originally, it was used to assess self-esteem of 5024 high school juniors and seniors
from randomly selected schools in New York State. It takes a form of a 10-item
Likert-type items scale (subjects read statements that they are supposed to respond
to by marking one from five options from “strongly agree” to “strongly disagree”),
easy to administer and interpret. The high test—retest reliability and high internal
consistency account for its popularity. A potential problem of RSE is that the
questions in it can be easily divided into “positive” and “negative” ones, making the
measure liable to the social desirability effect (Heatherton & Wyland, 2003).
Blascovich and Tomaka (1991) remark that the majority of scales suffer from the
same disadvantage, so it does not lower its utility considerably.
The Coopersmith Self-Esteem Inventory (SEI) (1967) was first developed for use
with children and later adapted for adults (Ryden, 1978). It was first used on
eighty-seven 5th and 6th-grade boys and girls and after several weeks with a sample
of 1748 children from public schools of central Connecticut (Coopersmith, 1967). It
correlates highly with the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale and Janis-Field Feelings of
Inadequacy Scale (Janis & Field, 1959). The scale is meant to measure self-regard
in four specific domains: peers, parents, school, and personal interests. Participants
have to respond to questions (reduced by Coopersmith in 1975 from the original
number of 50 to 25) by choosing one of two options: “like me” or “unlike me”.
One of the most widely used measures of self-regard in children is The Piers-
Harris Children’s Self-Concept Scale (Piers, 1984). The scale was standardized
with a group of 1183 children and adolescents from a Pennsylvania school system,
aged 7–18, representing seven races. It has a form of a self-report and consists of 60
items referring to six specific areas such as physical appearance, happiness and
satisfaction, popularity, etc. The items are descriptive statements that the subjects
have to respond to by choosing a “yes” or “no” response. It is used both in schools
and clinics in order to plan necessary interventions in subjects with self-esteem
problems.
Another frequently used measure is Janis-Field Feelings of Inadequacy Scale
(JFS) (Janis & Field, 1959), first tried with 184 male and female high school juniors
and modified several times (by Eagly in 1967 for college students; Fleming &
Courtney in 1984, also for college students). JFS is a multidimensional 36-item,
7-point scale that measures self-regard, academic abilities, social confidence,
appearance, etc. Blascovich and Tomaka (1991) indicated its version from 1984 as
the best scale to be used with adults.
The Tennessee Self-Concept Scale (Fitts & Roid, 1988) is targeted at almost all
age groups (7–90 years of age). It was originally administered to 626 participants
from various parts of the US (males and females, blacks and whites, diverse social
backgrounds). It consists of six scales measuring specific self-esteem (self-concept)
in six domains: physical, moral, personal, family, social, academic and professional.
Respondents have to report how true each statement is about them on a five-point
scale (ranging from “always true” to “always false”) to obtain a total self-concept
score.
The assessment instruments presented before according to Blascovich and
Tomaka’s (1991) frequency-of-use ranking, were all designed to measure trait
self-esteem (the way people generally evaluate themselves), while the one called
The Current Thoughts Scale or State Self-Esteem Scale (SSES), developed by
Heatherton and Polivy in 1991 (Hobza, Walker, Yakushko, & Peugh, 2007) focuses
on short-lived changes in self-esteem occurring at a given point in time (state
self-esteem). It consists of 20 items, for instance “I feel displeased with myself”,
rated on a scale from 1 (“never”) to 5 (“extremely”), subdivided into three com-

ponents of self-esteem—performance, social self-esteem and appearance
self-esteem. The original sample groups consisted of ca 700 students and under-
graduates from the University of Toronto (www.excellenceforchildandyouth.ca).
The scale helps to unravel the complicated link between mood and feelings about
the self.
One more scale that adds a colour to the palette of measures is The
Contingencies of Self-Worth Scale mentioned in Sect. 2.1 (Crocker & Wolfe,
2001). It was developed by Crocker et al. (2003) as an instrument to evaluate the
importance of domains on which people’s self-worth is contingent (the areas of life
in which successes and failures have a strong influence on one’s self-esteem). The
scale (administered for standardization to 1418 college students), made up of 35
items, equally distributed on seven types of contingencies, places them in two major
categories: internal and external contingencies. The informants are requested to
evaluate each item (a statement) using a 7-point-Likert scale (from 1-strongly
disagree to 7-strongly agree). The scale is distinct from other measures as it does
not only answer the question whether one’s sense of self-worth is related to a
domain but how strong the relation is.
More recently implicit self-esteem measures have been developed. They involve
indirect measurement of cognitive processing that is presumed to be related to
implicit self-esteem. Such procedures enable researchers to minimize the control of
the process by the subject. Studies of implicit self-esteem rely on automatic acti-
vation of associations between the cognitive representation of self and a repre-
sentation of objects related to self, such as initials, characters in one’s name,
personal pronouns, dates of birth, etc. It is assumed that the affect directed at the self
is extended to self-associated objects (Fila-Jankowska, 2009). Thereby, people are
believed to reveal preference for the letters of alphabet which appear in their first
names or surnames (Name Letter Task—NLT). Selecting “their” letters above other
letters from a set of many reflects a more positive attitude towards the self (Banaji &
Greenwald, 1995). An alternative method is based on comparing reaction times
needed for co-classifying objects representing the self and some positive attributes,
and for co-classifying objects representing the self and negative attributes. The
speed of these associations conveys the level of implicit self-esteem. The method is
known as The Implicit Association Test—IAT (Greenwald, McGhee, & Schwartz
in Fila-Jankowska, 2009; Karpinski, 2004).
The examples of scales presented above have been selected due to the frequency
of use or focus areas that make them distinct. Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (1965)
measures only global self-esteem without recognizing how an individual evaluates
himself/herself in specific domains. Similarly, the implicit self-esteem measures
(Banaji & Greenwald, 1995; Greenwald, McGhee, & Schwartz, 1998) focus on
general self-regard, but they are targeted at the self-evaluation that an individual is
not aware of. Among the scales that scrutinize specific self-esteem, there are dif-
ferences in the selection of domains and ages of the participant populations. The
domains that seem to bear special importance to researchers are social relations,
academic performance and appearance. The scales by Piers-Harris (1984),
Fitts and Roid (1988) or Heatherton and Polivy (1991) share the direction at the
social aspects and school achievement. The ones by Piers-Harris (1984) and Fitts
and Roid (1988) encompass the domains of appearance, and additionally, personal
satisfaction and happiness.
For the purposes of the current empirical research (presented in chapter three),
two scales will be applied—one to measure global and the other to measure specific
self-esteem. These will be Rosenberg’s Self-Esteem Scale (1965) and The
Tennessee Self-Concept Scale (Fitts & Roid, 1988) respectively. The former enjoys
great popularity among researchers as one whose reliability and validity have been
thoroughly verified. Besides, its length is its merit, which is important for admin-
istrative reasons—it is going to be combined with the other scale mentioned, and
time constraints need to be considered. The Tennessee Self-Concept Scale/TSCS
(ibid) contains a section on academic self-esteem, which is particularly relevant to
the book, and it was designed for a wide range of ages.
By no means is the inventory of self-esteem measures complete—it contains
only the most popular ones. The truth is that the diversity of instruments lets
researchers tailor the research method precisely to the goals of study and needs of
specific groups.
2.2.2 The Issue of Validity in Researching Self-esteem

Revisited
Self-esteem is a complex construct and researchers needs to pose themselves a

question about the specific goal of their study. Should the goal be to assess
self-esteem of a person, representative of a certain population of subjects grouped
according to a given criterion, the quantitative method will be more valid as it is
likely to satisfy the criteria of prediction and replication. Yet, if the goal is to study
selected aspects of phenomena experienced by real, individual people, then the
qualitative methods may be a better choice (Jackson in Mruk, 2006).
Experimental investigation is based on the criteria of prediction and replication.
But this is only one kind of knowledge. There are other kinds of knowledge that
elude the criteria of prediction and replication; and a specific example is knowledge
about self-esteem as a meaningful experience in a person’s life. This kind of
knowledge resides in a system of relations that is unique and irreducible in each
separate instance. Such knowledge cannot be captured by a method that breaks it
into standard components. The experiment, however, is designed to perform exactly
this kind of reduction. It is aimed at washing out the very information which we
seek—namely, information about unique and specific constellations of personal
meaning (p. 58). Mruk (2006) concludes that study participants are more often than
not “quantitative objects” subject to laws that govern whole classes of psycho-
logical or sociological phenomena. On the other hand, human beings are “conscious
identities” with individual characteristics that only qualitative methods can give an
insight into. Qualitative studies, as quantitative ones, must meet the criterion of
validity. A research that is characterized by construct validity produces results that
are consistent with the relevant theoretical model. If a description of research results
skips something important about a phenomenon, the validity of the findings is
lower. Accordingly, combining quantitative and qualitative research paradigms to
make it accountable is highly recommendable “as doing otherwise is likely to
produce an incomplete social science of self-esteem” (p. 61).
2.3 The Role of Self-esteem in Psychological Functioning
The importance of self-esteem for different aspects of psychological functioning

puzzled researchers since the turn of the 19th and 20th century when James (1890)
put forward his meaningful hypothesis that the level of positive self-regard depends
on the proportion of successes against ambitions in areas that are personally sig-
nificant to people. In the course of time, the studies into the matter produced results
that were sometimes conflicting. The subsequent sections will focus on those
findings that are salient in educational contexts, and in particular, in the foreign
language learning experience.
2.3.1 Participation in Social Groups and Likeability
A classroom is an environment where social behaviours and subjective attitudes

play an important role. The question whether self-regard determines them or not
was already tackled by one of the pioneers of self-esteem research, that is
Coopersmith (1967) whose subjects were 10-12-year-old children and their parents
or teachers. The research instruments were a self-esteem scale (Coopersmith
Self-Esteem Inventory) and questionnaires that dealt with the acceptance by
classmates and teacher ratings. Surprisingly, popularity in classroom settings did
not correlate with the subjective experience of esteem, which means that
self-attitudes were not associated with the peers’ perceptions of an individual.
Similarly, the study by Bishop and Inderbitzen (in Baumeister, Campbell, Krueger,
& Vohs, 2003) proved no correlation between likeability and self-esteem. The
informants, who were 542 ninth-grade students, indicated their most and least liked
peers. Subsequently, each person was placed in the ranking of popularity. The
researchers concluded that self-esteem neither results from peer approval nor is the
source of social popularity. Analogically, in groups of Canadian 161 fourth and
151-seventh graders, where teachers’ ratings were used for evaluating the inter-
personal behaviour and social desirability, no correlation was found between
self-esteem and either of the factors (Adams, Ryan, Ketsetzis, & Keating, 2000).
Interestingly, the research by Buhrmerster, Furman, Wittenberg, and Reis (1988)
showed that people with high self-esteem (young adults) rated themselves high on
interpersonal skills, while others’ ratings placed them significantly lower. In other
words, self-rated social skills correlated strongly with self-esteem while others-rated
social skills showed substantially lower correlation with self-esteem. The tool used
in the study was the Interpersonal Competence Questionnaire/ICQ, (Buhrmerster
et al., 1988), which is a 40-item self-report measure in which participants (130
undergraduates enrolled in a psychology course) were asked to assess their ability
to handle a variety of tasks in five domains of interpersonal competence. The
self-ratings and the others’ ratings gave different scores in the five domains, hence
the discrepancy in the ultimate correlation with self-esteem (ibid).
The investigation of self-esteem and interpersonal liking was also the goal of
research by Vohs and Heatherton (2006), whose informants were 49 undergradu-
ates. One of the measurement tool was the self-esteem scale based on one devised
by Janis and Fields (1959), the other was the Remote Associates Test (Mednick in
Vohs & Heatherton, 2006), which served as the manipulation of ego-threat con-
ditions. The authors examined likeability ratings of high and low self-esteem
undergraduates who were placed in situations of contrived experimental ego threats.
Having experienced ego threats, high self-esteem subjects were evaluated as less
likeable and possessing less favourable personality traits, while those with low
self-esteem were seen as more likeable and possessing more favourable personality
traits.
Unlike popularity rates, perceived social support correlates positively with
self-esteem according to Budd, Buschman, and Esch (2009). The study utilized the
Index of Self-Esteem/ISE (Hudson in Budd et al., 2009). This 24-item scale
measures the amount, intensity, and/or significance of a problem an individual has
with self-esteem. The other instrument was the Social Support Appraisals Scale/
SSA/ (Vaux et al., 1986). Social support, viewed by the researchers as the quality of
social relationships, falls into two categories—emotional, which means caring and
empathy, and practical, which stands for helping and exchanging information. In
the study conducted on 46 university students and graduates, self-esteem increased
as the social support increased. The findings of the study coincide with those from
earlier research. Wong, Wiest, and Cusick (2002) found that students have higher
self-esteem and competence in an environment which is socially supportive. The
group under study consisted of 135 sixth-graders. One of the tools used was The
Inventory of Parent Peer Attachment (Armsden & Greenberg in Wong et al., 2002),
which assesses perceptions of attachment to parents and peers (only the parent
subscale was utilized). The other one was Self-Perception Profile for Children
(Harter in Wong et al., 2002). The correlation between the constructs was found to
be positive, which proved that learners who enjoy a warm relationship with their
parents develop a better sense of self-worth. Consequently, improving the level of
social support for students may lead to an increase in self-esteem and strengthen the
sense of competence, which may, in turn, result in higher achievement. The
direction of causality between healthy social relationships and the feelings of
selfworth is hard to establish, though.
2.3 The Role of Self-esteem in Psychological Functioning 57
2.3.2 Conformity and Leadership
Another issue that is interwoven with functioning in social contexts is conformity.

People who hold themselves in low regard feel more threatened by dealing with
unfavourable reactions to unpopular opinions they might want to express, according
to claims made by Coopersmith (1967). In his questionnaire, Coopersmith (1967)
asked his adolescent subjects whether they would prefer to say nothing or some-
thing that would make people angry with them in discussions of public affairs. The
low self-esteem subjects declared that they would find enough courage to speak
in situations of overwhelming consensus but refrain from expressing their stand-
point representing a different opinion. They would not make charismatic leaders or
proponents of minority positions. Since such persons are highly self-critical, they
expect others to evaluate them in a similar way. They are preoccupied with their
deficiencies (real or imagined), and, as a consequence, they reduce their own
potential for obtaining successes.
Similar results were achieved by LePine and Van Dyne (1998), whose study was
based on 600 employees of 21 organizations. They examined the factor that they
referred to as voice, that is the willingness to speak in a group and advocate an
alternative course of action. Group members with higher self-esteem engaged in
more voice behaviour than their lower self-esteem counterparts. Additionally, the
voice correlated negatively with the size of the group—all the participants
demonstrated less willingness to speak in front of large groups, and those low in
self-esteem showed a more definite decline. Hernandez (1999) published the results
of a study that resonated with the two previously mentioned. There were two scales
used in this study to test for the link between conformity and self-esteem. The first
was the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (1965), and the other was a scale developed
by the researcher. She engaged 23 college students in the study, and found a
negative correlation between the constructs, but the sample was rather small, so the
results must be approached with a measure of cautiousness.
The studies of the correlation between leadership and self-esteem produced
results largely congruent with Coopersmith’s (1967) claim that low self-esteem
people are not cut out to be leaders. Chermers, Watson, and May (in Baumeister
et al., 2003) worked with a group of military cadets who were offered leadership
training. The measures of leadership qualities consisted of military professors’ rat-
ings, peers’ ratings and assessment of performance in leadership tasks. The corre-
lational analyses revealed significant effects of self-esteem on leadership.
2.3.3 Creativity
Creativity requires some courage to express an innovative view or present a new

product with the full awareness of the fact that adverse or hostile receptions may
follow. Creative products may in a sense pose threats to existing standards.
“An essential component of the creative process, whether it be analysis, or the

development of a new perspective (…), is the conviction that one’s judgement in
interpreting the events to be trusted” (Coopersmith, 1967, p. 59). The study of
adolescents’ creativity and its relation with self-esteem was carried out by
Coopersmith (1967), who asked his informants to complete a series of creativity
tests and The Self-Esteem Inventory designed by himself. The analysis of results
showed that groups representing high self-esteem performed in the most creative
ways in all the tests, while groups low in self-esteem were less creative and original.
A correlation between the two variables was also found by Goldsmith and Matherly
(1988), who administered three self-report measures of creativity and three mea-
sures of self-esteem to 118 subjects, and by Al-Qaisy and Turki (2011). The latter
team of researchers had adolescent subjects whom they presented with creativity
tests and questionnaires examining several facets of self-esteem (self-concept). The
correlation was noticeably higher for total (global), educational, intellectual and
moral self-esteem than for physical, temperament and social self, which implies that
the sense of worthiness and confidence in intellectual potential positively affect the
skills to produce novel ideas and solutions.
2.3.4 Antisocial Behaviour
Behaviour that is unacceptable from the social point of view, such as cheating, was
found by Lobel and Levanon (1988) to have some connection with self-esteem. In
the experiment, the participants, who were 12-year-old Israeli boys and girls
(N = 228), were tested in self-esteem, need for approval, and cheating. The par-
ticipants completed the Children’s Social Desirability Questionnaire (Crandal et al.,
as cited in Lobel & Levanon, 1998) and the Coopersmith Self-Esteem Inventory
(1967), and were given unsolvable problems at which they could “succeed” only by
cheating. Self-esteem did not have a direct effect on cheating but the effect was
mediated by the need for approval. The participants who were found to cheat the
most and the least had high self-esteem. As a matter of fact, those who had both
high self-esteem and a high need for approval cheated the most, while those who
had high self-esteem and a low need for approval cheated the least. As the
researchers explained, the results may be accounted for by reference to true and
defensive self-esteem. The holders of defensive self-esteem feel a pressing need to
be accepted by others, and in their efforts to maintain their positive portrayal, they
may resort to different solutions, including cheating.
School disciplinary problems were proved by DeWit et al. (in Baumeister, 2003)
to be partly related to self-esteem. A large sample of Canadian secondary school
students (N = 1000) completed self-esteem questionnaires and self-reports on con-
crete types of school misbehaviour (cf. being suspended, detained, playing truant,
etc.). There was no correlation between the variables. Conversely, less verifiable
forms of problems, such as recurring patterns of hostile or defiant behaviour were
related to low self-esteem. Donellan, Trzesniewski, Robins, Moffit, and Kaspi (2005)
found a link between aggression and self-esteem, and between delinquency and
self-esteem. The self-reports of Canadian boys, aged 11–14 and their teachers’ rat-
ings showed a negative correlation between self-esteem and aggression or delin-
quency as manifestations of antisocial behaviour. Salmivalli, Kaukianen,
Kaistaniemi, and Lagerspetz (1999), who researched a sample of over 300 Finnish
adolescents, obtained results that did not go along the same lines as those by
Donellan et al. (2005). They did not find any significant correlation between the
self-reported self-esteem and the measures of bullying based on reports from the
participants’ peers. As a matter of fact, the study followed a more complex scheme
because it combined measures of self-rated with others-rated self-esteem in order to
facilitate the distinction between genuine and defensive or fragile self-esteem. The
only regularities observed was that people categorized as having defensive high
self-esteem were slightly more frequently described as bullies by their peers, while
those with genuine self-esteem were more willing to defend the victims of bullying
(Baumeister et al., 2003).
Narcissism, which is defined as inflated or elevated self-esteem, is an antecedent
of socially abrasive behaviour (Sedikides et al., 2007). Bushman and Baumeister
(1998) found that it is a frequent cause of aggression. A situation of an insult, in
particular, is conducive to aggressive responses. The study involved 266 under-
graduate psychology students who completed self-esteem scales (RSES,
Rosenberg, 1965) and wrote essays for which they received overtly critical eval-
uations such as “This is the worst essay I’ve ever read.” The subjects who con-
sidered themselves as superior to others revealed the most angry and aggressive
responses to the ego threat situations that they had been manipulated into. Stucke
and Sporer (2002) also observed that failure and criticism provoked more aggres-
sion in narcissists than in other individuals, which is largely congruent with
Bushman and Baumeister’s findings (1998). Additionally, narcissism was found to
account for hostility in the workplace (Elias, 2013). The research results defy the
common beliefs that it is low self-esteem that is responsible for interpersonally
exploitative behaviour. Other than that, they support the claims about the hetero-
geneity of self-esteem.
As the findings of the researches quoted above reveal (see Table 2.1 for a
summary), high self-esteem does not guarantee popularity despite the fact that high
self-esteem people estimate their likeability rather high and do not fear rejection
(Bishop & Inderbitzen, 1995; Coopersmith, 1967). There is no doubt that inflated
self-esteem is responsible for undesirable social behaviours such as hostility or
unduly aggressive reactions to disapproval (Bushman & Baumeister, 1998; Elias,
2013; Stucke & Sporer, 2002). It is worth mentioning, though, that receiving social
support increases a person’s sense of worthiness (Budd et al., 2009; Wong et al.,
2002). As far as other aspects of social functioning are concerned, leadership
qualities and readiness to voice unpopular opinions were proved to correlate with
positive self-regard (Coopersmith, 1967; Hernandez, 1999; LePine & Van Dyne,
1998). Low fear of rejection mentioned above may partially explain why creativity
coincides with high sense of self-worth both in its global and specific dimensions
(Al-Qaisy & Turki, 2011; Coopersmith, 1967). The examination of the relationship
Table 2.1 Summary of the selected research on the relationship between self-esteem and
psychological functioning
Researcher Aim Results
Likeability
Coopersmith (1967) To assess whether self-esteem There is no relationship between
correlates with the acceptance by popularity and self-esteem
classmates
Bishop and To detect the link between No correlation was found;
Inderbitzen (1995) self-esteem and likeability self-esteem is neither the predictor
nor the consequence of social
popularity
Adams et al. (2000) To determine whether self-esteem Neither of the factors correlates
influences interpersonal behaviour with self-esteem
and social desirability
Vohs and Heatherton To explore the relationship When facing ego threat people
(2000) between self-esteem and high in self-esteem are seen as less
interpersonal liking in the likeable than low self-esteem
circumstances of ego threat holders
Wong et al. (2002) To examine whether social Socially supportive environment
support has an impact on accounts for increase in
self-esteem and competence self-esteem and confidence
Budd et al. (2009) To find the correlation be-tween Self-esteem increases as social
perceived social sup-port and sup-port increases
self-esteem
Conformity and leadership
Coopersmith (1967) To observe whether self-esteem Low self-worth leads to refraining
correlates with conformity in from voicing a different opinion in
pre-adolescents public
LePine and Van To observe whether self-esteem Higher self-esteem results in more
Dyne (1998) correlates with conformity in willingness to speak and express
adults an adverse opinion in a group
Chermers, Watson, To scrutinize the relationship Low self-esteem individuals have
and May (in between self-esteem and less leadership instinct
Baumeister, 2003) leadership
Creativity
Coopersmith (1967) To explore the linkage between High self-esteem subjects are
self-esteem and creativity more creative and original than
their low self-esteem counterparts
Al-Qaisy and Turki To assess the relationship between There is a high correlation
(2011) different facets of self-esteem and between global, educational,
creativity intellectual self-concept and
creativity
(continued)
Table 2.1 (continued)

Antisocial behavior
Lobel and Levanon To check whether self-esteem People with defensive self-esteem
(1988) correlates with cheating are more likely to resort to
cheating in order to create their
positive im-age
Salmivalli et al. To establish if there is a relation No significant correlation was
(1999) between self-esteem and bullying found
Donellan et al. To explore the relationship • There is a negative correlation
(2005) between self-esteem and some between self-esteem and
types of antisocial behaviour aggression
• There is a negative correlation
between self-esteem and
delinquency
Bushman and To observe whether narcissism is Insult and criticism trigger
Baumeister (1998), socially destructive aggressive responses in people
Stucke and Sporer with inflated self-esteem
(2002)
Elias (2013) To check whether narcissistic There is a positive correlation
self-esteem correlates with between the variables
hostility
between self-esteem and different aspects of psychological functioning presented

above focused on those of them which are meaningful in educational context. The
need arises, however, to gain a deeper insight into the issue of the impact of the
focal construct on learning experience as many correlates of self-esteem are highly
relevant to academic achievement.
2.4 Self-esteem and Learning
There has been quite solid research on the role of self-representations, such as
self-esteem or self-concept in academic achievement, and it has produced a wide
range of results. Proving that there is a firm, causal link between a learner’s
self-regard and educational attainment would mean that there is a pressing need to
work on the enhancement of the former in anticipation of improvement in the latter
variable.
Low self-worthiness is often associated with downplaying the effort put in tasks
and expecting worse results. Morrison, Thomas, and Weaver (1973) propounded a
hypothesis that students with low self-esteem would predict getting lower grades on
an examination than those with high self-esteem. They designed an experiment in
which they asked their informants (72 undergraduate psychology students) to
estimate their results on a midterm test before handing it in, and to complete
self-esteem scales. The results confirmed the hypothesis—the students with low
self-esteem (measured by the Coopersmith Self-Esteem Scale, 1967) would antic-
ipate that they performed worse on the test than the students with high self-esteem.
As claimed before, less value attributed to oneself is ensued by less value placed on
one’s efforts and achievements.
The exploration of the relationship between self-esteem and learning attainment
produced quite dispersed results. Alves-Martins, Peixoto, Gouveia-Pereira, Amaral,
and Pedro (2002) investigated the issue in a group of 7th, 8th and 9th-grade secondary
school students (13–19 years old), who were administered Harter’s Self-Perception
Profile for Adolescents adapted by Peixoto et al. (cited in Alves-Martins et al., 2002).
The statistic computations revealed no causal linkage between global self-esteem and
academic achievement in the groups of 8th and 9th-graders, which means that there
are no differences between self-esteem felt by students with high level of academic
achievement and those with low levels. The results obtained in the youngest group
did not conform to those of the older ones—the students with low levels of
achievement suffered from low self-esteem, which implies that academic results
impact the self-esteem of younger adolescents. A viable explanation for the fact that
older adolescents maintain their self-worth at high level in spite of poor academic
performance is that they attach less importance to school-related matters in favour of
sport or social relations.
The correlation between school achievement and self-esteem viewed as a hier-
archical construct was represented by Sanchez and Roda (2003). Their aim was
exploring the link between achievement in mathematics and subject-specific
self-esteem, as well as between reading skills and specific self-esteem. The
respondents, who were sixth-class Spanish primary school children (N = 245),
completed the Self-Description Questionnaire by Marsh, Parker, and Smith
(adapted by Elexpuru, in Sanchez & Roda, 2003), while their attainment in maths
and reading was demonstrated by grades given by the teachers. It was discovered
that subject-specific self-esteem correlates with achievement in the respective
subject. Specific self-esteem was claimed to have a predictive value with regard to
academic performance in corresponding areas. In a similar vein, Marsh, and Craven
(2006), who carried out a review of causal ordering studies, postulated the influence
of academic self-esteem on academic achievement. Additionally, the analysis of the
reciprocal effects model of the causal ordering of domain-specific self-concept and
performance, showed that academic self-regard is both a cause and an effect of
academic achievement. In conclusion, it has to be emphasized that global and
specific self-esteem are not the same constructs, they have different correlates, and
the terms cannot be used synonymously.
The question of the interplay between school success and the students’
self-evaluations was taken further by Pullmann and Allik (2008), who focused their
research on slightly older respondents, i.e. university students and university
applicants (N = 4572). The measure instruments used were the Estonian version of
Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (Pullmann & Allik, 2008) and Academic Self-Esteem
Scale (Marsh in Pullmann & Allik, 2008). Astonishing though it may seem, the
combination of low general and high academic self-esteem was found to be a
2.4 Self-esteem and Learning 63
significant predictor of superior school attainment. The reason for the coincidence
may lie in the fact that students with higher cognitive abilities and better academic
results seem more likely to reflect on the quality of their performance, and, being
aware of their downsides, they tend to be more critical of themselves. As a con-
sequence, they rate themselves lower on global self-esteem. Meanwhile, low
achievers apply self-protecting strategies, i.e. they downplay the role of
school-related areas and save their general self-liking (ibid).
A more recent study by Okoko (2012), which, unlike the ones described in the
previous paragraphs (by Pullmann & Allik, 2008; Sanchez & Roda, 2003), focused
on global self-esteem, cast a new light on its relationship with school achievement.
The respondents (N = 300) from Kenyan secondary schools completed an adapted
version of the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (1965), while their learning achieve-
ment was rendered by Grade Point Average (GPA). The correlation between the
variables was found to be positive. The interpretation of the results presented by the
researcher was that the students who demonstrated higher academic achievement
were praised and rewarded by the teachers, which let them enjoy high self-esteem.
By contrast, the learners with poor performance showed signs of despair and
believed that they could not accomplish satisfying results, even if they worked hard.
Following the findings, the researchers indicated the nurturing or debilitating role of
school environment in fostering students’ self-liking (Okoko, 2012).
It has been discovered that the causal direction of academic self-esteem and
achievement fluctuates with age (Liu, 2009). The academic self-esteem of primary
pupils tends to be affected by school performance. At higher stages, the two factors
are more likely to affect each other. As learners grow older (around ten years of
age), their academic self-views become more strongly reciprocally related with
academic achievement (Guay, Marsh, & Boivin in Marsh & Craven, 2006). De
Fraine, Van Damme, and Onghena (2007), whose informants were 2862 Flemish
adolescents from 50 secondary schools, discovered a positive correlation between
specific self-esteem (self-concept) and achievement, the magnitude of which
weakened throughout the course of secondary education. Additionally, the
respondents’ academic self-views became lower. The decrease in the academic
dimension of secondary school students’ self-image (classes 7 through 11) was also
detected by Józsa (2002) in her longitudinal study of 277 Hungarians.
Simultaneously, academic achievement, rendered by grades, worsened as well.
Peter-Szarka (2012), who focused her research on classes 5 through 8, confirmed
the decrease in academic self-concept, and indicated that the most noticeable
change occurred between class 6 and 8.
As previous research produced rather inconclusive results as far as the linkage
between global self-esteem and academic achievement is concerned, Peixoto and
Almeida (2010) posed a question what strategies underachieving students might
possibly apply in order to avoid the degradation of their self-views. The participants
of the study, based on self-representations and attitudes scales, were seventh, eighth
and ninth-graders (N = 955) from secondary schools in Lisbon, more than 30% of
whom (N = 355) had retaken a year at least once before. The results showed that
the students who had experienced academic failure resorted to devaluing school
attainment, and shifting weight to non-academic dimensions of self-esteem.
The studies inventoried above produced discrepant results, but the majority of
them lead to the conclusion that self-views and academic strivings are related, and,
at some stages mutually supportive. It has to be remembered, though, that the age
factor may account for dynamics in the relationship. According to Alves-Martins
et al. (2002) late teenagers are less dependent on academic success for their general
self-liking (possibly because they are more efficient users of psychological disen-
gagement strategies claimed by Peixoto and Almeida (2010), while learners in their
early and middle teens find it more essential. For Okoko (2012), the correlation is
positive without any age reservations. Academic excellence is usually accompanied
with the feeling of satisfaction as well as positive reception by teachers, parents and
peers, which is bound to have a reinforcing effect on the learner’s self-esteem. The
researches also show that there is a significant relationship between specific (aca-
demic) self-esteem and learning attainment. Understandably, subject-specific
self-esteem correlates positively with success in the respective area (Sanchez &
Roda, 2003). In early years, school performance affects academic self-views,
whereas at secondary stages the influence becomes reciprocal, albeit weaker (Liu,
2009). See Table 2.2 for a summary.
Table 2.2 Summary of the selected research on the relationship between self-esteem and learning
Morrison et al. To scrutinize the relation between • Students with low self-esteem
(1973) self-esteem and value placed on one’s predict getting lower grades in an
effort and achievement exam than those with high
self-esteem
Alves-Martins To explore the link between • No link was found for 8th and
et al. (2002) self-esteem and general learning 9th-grade students
achievement • Academic results influence
global self-views of younger
learners
Sanchez and To explore the link between • There is a significant positive
Roda (2003) subject-specific self-esteem and correlation between specific
learning achievement in mathematics self-esteem and achievement in
and reading relevant areas
Pullmann and To investigate the relationship • The combination of low general
Allik (2008) between different dimensions of and high academic self-esteem is
self-esteem and academic the predictor of high academic
achievement achievement
Józsa (2002), To investigate the fluctuation • Academic self-esteem decreases
Peter-Szarka between specific dimensions of in secondary school students
(2012) self-esteem with age (between classes 6 and 11)
• Academic achievement affects
both global and specific
self-esteem
• Only specific self-esteem affects
grades
(continued)
2.5 Self-esteem and Learning a Foreign Language 65

Marsh and To scrutinize the interplay of • Academic self-concept affects
Craven (2006) academic self-concept and academic academic achievement
achievement
De Fraine, Van To observe the dependence of • The correlation becomes weaker
Damme, and specific self-esteem and achievement in the course of secondary
Onghena (2007) correlation on age education, academic self-concept
becomes lower
Peixoto and To identify the strategies of • Following academic failure
Almeida (2010) low-achieving students aimed at academic attainment is devalued
preserving positive self-views in favour of attainment in
non-academic domains
Okoko (2012) To scrutinize the relation between • There is a positive correlation
global self-esteem and school between the variables
achievement • School environment is critical to
self-esteem
2.5 Self-esteem and Learning a Foreign Language
The findings of research into the relationship between global self-esteem and
academic success seem rather inconclusive (see for example: Maruyama, Rubin, &
Kingsbury, 1981; Rosenberg, 1995). Moreover, the issue of influences between the
global construct and FL attainment has not been thoroughly explored. Hashemian
(2012) undertook an attempt at investigating it (among other aspects such as the
interrelation between self-esteem and the use of language learning strategies) in a
group of EFL learners (N = 120) in an Iranian language school. The research
instruments were an Oxford Placement Test (ibid) and Coopersmith’s Self-Esteem
Scale (Coopersmith, 1967). The statistical computation results revealed that the
variables are positively correlated, which rendered the author entitled to the claim
that increasing proficiency in FL accounts for growing self-esteem of a learner, and
consequently more confidence in using FL.
According to Marsh and Craven (2006), domain-specific self-esteem and aca-
demic achievement are mutually reinforcing constructs. Consequently, one can
postulate a claim that linguistic self-esteem (or self-concept, which is more fre-
quently used in reference to domain-specific level of self-esteem) will increase if the
learner is a high achiever, and, conversely, the achievement will be better if the
learner’s self-views are positive. This supposition encourages the portrayal of a
good language learner as a person who has every confidence in their student’s
abilities. The relation may not be a perfectly proportionate one, though. Liu (2009)
attempted to detect how self-concept fluctuates in time in homogenous
language-level groups. The participants in the study (126 Taiwanese college stu-
dents) were streamed into basic, intermediate and advanced groups, and they were
asked to complete an academic self-concept questionnaire at the beginning and at
the end of the academic year. The groups were using identical teaching materials
selected according to the level. The initial test revealed that the low-performing
students had significantly lower English self-concept than the middle and
high-performers, between whom the difference was statistically non-significant. The
final analysis proved that in the lowest-level group the overall English self-concept
increased considerably over the year. The change was similar in the intermediate
group, while in the highest-achieving group the self-concept remained steady. The
implication of the initial study is that domain-specific self-esteem/self-concept is
related to academic achievement in the respective domain. The post-test results
seemingly suggest that homogenous grouping may contribute to a noticeable
increase in academic self-confidence, which may be due to less denigrating effects
of across-group comparisons. Additionally, according to common beliefs, progress
in language learning is more noticeable at lower stages, and its magnitude may have
a positive, boosting effect on specific self-esteem (self-concept).
Although it may be beyond the focal point of the current section, it seems to be
worth mentioning that L1 self-esteem tends to decrease during secondary education
period (De Fraine, Van Damme, & Onghena, 2007). The fluctuations were exam-
ined in 2826 Flemish adolescents from grade 7 to grade 12. The decline in
domain-specific self-esteem was more rapid in female subjects. Also, the correlation
between language attainment and respective self-concept decreased in the course of
secondary school. It seems as if adolescence is the stage of life when side by side
with physical and physio-logical changes people undergo dynamic fluctuations in
their self-views in both global and specific strands.
Another self-related issue viewed as important by SLA researchers is the role of
academic self-esteem for building L2 motivation. Peter-Szarka (2012) explored the
relationship between the constructs and discovered that they are positively corre-
lated. Her study was longitudinal and involved 277 students from four primary
schools in Hungary. At the beginning and conclusion of the study they were in 5th
class (11–12 years old), and 8th class (14–15 years old) respectively. The instru-
ments were motivation and self-concept scales. The Tennessee Self-Concept Scale
(Fitts & Roid, 1988) includes several subscales such as Physical Self, Moral Self,
Individual Self (related to academic self-concept), Family Self, Social Self and
Critical Self, each concerning a separate aspect of self-esteem (see Sect. 2.2.1). All
self-concept scores, except Physical Self, were significantly related to foreign
language learning motivation. Moral, Individual, Family, Social Self, and the total
score were positively related to motivation, while Self-criticism was negatively
correlated to it. The role of the Moral, Family and Social Self as predictors of L2
learning motivation was emphasized by the researcher. As she concluded, “teachers
may influence students’ motivation, and form and improve their attitude toward
learning, but they cannot substitute parents’ learning values, positive attitudes and
encouragement” (p. 261). The negative correlation found between Self-criticism
and L2 motivation was interpreted as an indication of importance of classroom
atmosphere based on acceptance and empathy, rather than anxiety and criticism.
During the period of three years both L2 motivation and specific self-esteem/
self-concept decreased, which is congruent with the earlier claims that the onset of
adolescence is conducive to a noticeable lowering of self-views.
The mutual influence of self-esteem and attainment, as well as its determinants

bothered researchers for years, and so did the level of specificity of linguistic
self-esteem, which remained misty for a long time. Shavelson, Hubner, and Stanton
(1976) posited that specific self-esteem loads on academic and non academic
self-concept, the former being further subdivided into verbal and other dimensions.
The assumption of the existence of a single, representative verbal construct for all
the languages learnt by an individual was questioned by Yeung and Wong (2004),
who researched L2 self-esteem of people speaking three languages. The participants
were 460 primary and secondary teachers of English in Hong Kong, all of whom
knew Mandarin Chinese and Cantonese Chinese. Cantonese and English facets of
self-esteem were found to be negatively correlated, Mandarin and English showed
very low correlation. What is more, Cantonese and Mandarin self-esteem proved to
be negatively correlated. The specific strands of self-esteem of trilingual speakers
emerged as three distinct, unrelated constructs. The study cast serious doubt on
representativeness of general verbal self-esteem, which is, presumably, closest to
self-esteem in a learner’s native language.
The heterogeneity of linguistic self-esteem/self-concept was further explored by
Faber (2012), whose findings largely confirmed the earlier research results. L1 and
L2 self-perceptions were proved to be independent, uncorrelated factors. The study,
conducted with 256 secondary school students from an urban area, involved
completing academic self-esteem scales for German and English. Additionally, the
teachers completed questionnaires concerning the students’ proficiency levels in
German and English, as well as assessed students’ recent school grades in both
languages. Within each language there was a positive correlation between the
corresponding dimension of specific self-esteem (self-concept) and achievement
(manifested in proficiency ratings and grades) but the correlations across the sub-
jects were computed as statistically non-significant. As the author stated, “neither
contrasting nor assimilative effects across subjects could be demonstrated”
(p. 1172). The participants perceived their competencies in both subjects as separate
constructs. Consequently, one cannot infer a learner’s self-perceptions in one lan-
guage from their self-perceptions in another language.
Given that domain-specific linguistic self-esteem (self-concept) is hierarchical
and multifaceted, it may be assumed that its lower order constituents will also
comprise different dimensions. The multidimensionality of L2 self-esteem was
proved by Lau, Yeung, Jin, and Low (1999), who collected data from over 300
college students learning English as a second language in Hong Kong. The par-
ticipants completed a survey exploring academic self-perceptions in five linguistic
competencies: listening, speaking, reading, writing and global English. The items
were worded in the following way: “Compared to other students I’m good at
listening/speaking, etc.” The statistical analysis showed that skill-specific
self-perceptions were distinct constructs, which the subjects were able to discrim-
inate among. Still, the relations between the facets were close enough to form a
higher order construct (which the authors referred to as global English self-concept)
comprising the skill-specific ones. The conclusion drawn by the researchers was
that enhancing students’ domain-specific self-esteem may be effected both at
skill-specific and global English level as English self-esteem is inferred from the
skill-specific self-views.
The diversity of terminology in the area of self-beliefs may cause some difficulty
in grasping the tangle of mutual influences between some of the self-related con-
structs and their correlates. As presented in Chapter One, self-esteem that refers to a
learner’s evaluation of oneself in a selected situation, such as work or education
represents a more specific level than global, overall self-view, and should be
referred to as situational self-esteem (Brown, 2007). The relationship between
situational self-esteem connected with foreign a language learning and residential
location of the learners was explored by Bogdan (2011). The informants of the
study were 80 junior secondary Polish students, while the research instruments were
questionnaires focused on their SLA attitudes and situational self-esteem (based on
a scale by Lawrence, cited in Bogdan, 2011). The respondents from rural back-
ground revealed lower levels of situational self-esteem in comparison with those
from non-rural one. The author explained the difference with their better access to
educational facilities, higher financial status and more support from parents expe-
rienced by the respondents from urban areas. All the factors mentioned may well
contribute to building learners’ self-confidence.
The findings of the studies presented above (see Table 2.3 for an overview)
show that the way a learner views him or herself is presumably related to FL
attainment. It is easier, though, to cite evidence for the link between domain-
Table 2.3 Summary of the selected research on language-specific self-esteem and language
learning
Lau et al. To explore the hierarchical nature of L2 L2 self-concept is a higher order
(1999) self-concept construct derived from
skill-specific self-perceptions
Yeung and To research the conceptual framework Verbal self-concept is further
Wong (2004), of verbal self-concept subdivided into distinct L1, L2,
Faber (2012) etc. self-concepts
Liu (2009) To explore the dynamics of linguistic • The domain-specific self-esteem/
self-concept in time in groups self-concept of the lowest-level
representing homogenous language learners increases more
level significantly than that of
higher-level subjects, which is
higher at the onset of the study
• Self-concept is correlated with
academic achievement in the
respective domain
Bogdan (2011) To study the relationship between Students from rural areas have
situational self-esteem connected with lower level of situational
language learning and residential self-esteem
location
Peter-Szarka To detect whether academic The constructs are positively
(2012) self-esteem is related to L2 motivation correlated
specific/situational self-esteem and achievement. It is worth noting that the lan-

guage self-esteem does not have a monolithic structure, and its dimensions, i.e. L1,
L2…LN self-esteem are separate, unrelated constructs, which correlate with cor-
responding proficiency in incomparable ways. Lower level learners, for whom
noticing progress is easier, tend to derive from it more benefit for the level of their
linguistic confidence than the more advanced ones. Interestingly, learners from rural
settings demonstrate lower linguistic (situational) self-esteem than those from cities,
probably due to the fact that they have access to better educational facilities,
learning resources and better teachers, which leads to more satisfying learning
results.
2.5.1 Self-esteem and Performance in FL
The investigation of the effect of self-esteem on performance in FL has not been

extremely extensive, and it has focused on the main language skills. Heyde (in
Nogueras, 1996) studied the impact of three levels of self-esteem (global, situa-
tional and task) on oral production of French by 181 American college students
who were asked to evaluate their worthiness in situations when they had to use L2.
Task self-esteem was measured by means of errors and comparisons tasks. The one
based on error detection involved making evaluations of performance on a speech,
and the comparison one consisted in evaluating performance on a speech with the
performance of other students in the group. Both types of task self-esteem were
examined before and after the participants performed the tasks. The researcher
found that all the three levels correlated significantly with oral performance mea-
sures but the highest correlation occurred between task and oral production. Only
global self-esteem measure (Coopersmith Self-Esteem Scale/SES, 1967) was used
by Niki Maleki and Mohammadi (2009) to explore its correlation with spoken
performance of Arak University (Iran) students of English as foreign language. The
oral tasks were short student-to-student interviews followed by oral reports on the
partners’ personalities. The results partly overlapped with Heyde’s findings—high
global self-esteem coincided with high speaking skills. In a similar vein, Koosha,
Ketabi, and Kassaian (2011) studied the relation between the constructs but they
split their assessment of speaking skills into several aspects such as vocabulary,
structure, pronunciation, fluency and comprehensibility, which were tested by
means of Fahrady’s scale (Fahrady, 2005 in Koosha et al., 2011). The instrument
measuring self-esteem was Sorensen’s scale (ibid). Interestingly, the strongest
correlation was found between self-esteem and fluency while the other aspects of
speaking proficiency remained in an insignificant correlation. The authors conclude
that students with higher levels of self-esteem are more sociable, more risk taking
and more eager to exchange their views with others without being preoccupied with
whether what they produce is lexically or grammatically accurate. In other words,
for the person who has a positive view of his worth, fluency comes before accuracy
as the communicative effectiveness is of primary importance. Moreover, as all the
studies prove, willingness to communicate (WTC) depends on how positively the

learner evaluates themselves.
The literature on self-esteem proposes that there is an important relationship
between the construct and language anxiety (Ortega, 2007). Low-esteem learners
tend to feel anxious, with a debilitative effect, when asked to perform in front of
others (communication apprehension), in testing situations (test anxiety) or when
evaluated by the instructor and the classmates (fear of negative evaluation)
(Piechurska-Kuciel, 2012). The relation was proved by Zare and Riasati (2012),
who asked informants from an Iranian university to complete the Foreign Language
Classroom Anxiety Scale (FLCAS) and the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (RSES).
The correlation between the measures was negative, thereby confirming the claim
that learners who have a low self-perception feel highly anxious in classroom
settings.
The language skill that is very vulnerable to harmful effects of anxiety and low
self-regard is speaking. The research conducted by Kitano (Piechurska-Kuciel,
2008) focused on anxiety and skill-specific self-perception, as well as fear of
negative evaluation and self-perception of speaking skills. The participants were
212 American university students of Japanese. The analysis of the results enabled
the researcher to propound that language anxiety may be associated with lower
self-views on speaking ability. The claim remains in accord with one propounded
by Niki Maleki and Mohammadi (2009), whose study was mentioned above. Apart
from a correlation between speaking performance and self-esteem the researchers
proved a link between oral production and anxiety. The findings concerning
speaking-induced anxiety are reinforced by the results of more recent research
conducted by Rashidi, Yamini, and Shafiei (2012), with 135 Iranian university
students, native speakers of Persian, as informants. The relationship between
self-esteem and target language communication apprehension was explored via
questionnaires—The Personal Report of Communication Apprehension, developed
by McCroskey (1982) and The Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (1965). The statistical
analysis let the researchers conclude that an increase in oral communication
apprehension is associated with a decrease in self-esteem. The relationship between
the constructs can be explained by the fact that low self-esteem speakers are afraid
that they do not present any special value to offer and may face a critical reaction
from others.
It is not only speaking in a foreign language that may cause low
self-esteem-related apprehension. As a matter of fact, all the other language skills
are subject to this interplay. Hassan (2001) undertook to determine if writing
self-esteem and writing apprehension are related to the quality and quantity of
writing of university students of English as a FL. The instruments developed for the
purposes of the study were the English Writing Questionnaire, a Foreign Language
Self-esteem Scale and a writing task (a composition). It was found that writing
apprehension correlates negatively with self-esteem, and low apprehensive partic-
ipants wrote better quality compositions. However, neither self-esteem nor writing
apprehension had any effect on the quantity of writing. The researcher concluded
that students who are apprehensive about writing tend to feel less positive about
themselves, and ultimately produce lower quality pieces.
A significant, positive correlation between self-esteem and achievement in
writing in L2 was also found by Al-Hattab (2006). The study comprised global,
specific and task self-esteem measurement, administered to randomly selected,
third-year secondary students from two public schools in Saudi Arabia. One of the
instruments was A Questionnaire of Self-Esteem in English Writing for Third Year
Secondary Students, designed by the researcher. It contained three sections—
measuring global, specific and task self-esteem. The skill of writing in L2 was
measured by an English Writing Achievement Test, also constructed by the
researcher. Interestingly, only specific and task self-esteem were significantly cor-
related with writing attainment, the correlation between global construct and writing
was non-significant. It needs to be mentioned that the sample was rather small
(N = 81), so the results should be treated with caution, nonetheless they echo the
claims made by Sanchez and Roda (2006), that domain-specific self-esteem is more
substantially correlated with achievement in the corresponding area, than global
self-esteem.
An apparently similar question about the relationship between a specific foreign
language skill and learners’ self-views was posed by Kartal (2011), who took into
consideration attitudes towards L2 reading and their possible link with specific
self-esteem. As a matter of fact, the study had manifold purposes, but for the need
of the book only the relation between beliefs about reading and self-perceptions is
mentioned. The measure instrument was a questionnaire which contained items
relating to reading attitudes, specific self-esteem (self-concept) and other constructs,
such as anxiety or comfort. The participants were English, French and German
foreign language teacher trainees from a university in Turkey (N = 230). They
represented the three respective departments and were all in the final year of their
four-year course. The report on the findings rendered differences among the
departments. The results obtained from the English teacher trainees showed a
significant positive correlation between attitudes towards reading and specific
self-esteem, while the subjects from the French and German departments had scores
which were not significant. The English batch also scored higher than the other two
in academic achievement measured by grade point average. The author does not
provide any explanation for the differences in results among the departments, but it
can be presumed that higher achievement accounts for better self-perceptions, in
accordance with Marsh and Craven’s (2006) findings. The relationship between
reading comprehension skills and self-esteem was studied by Bagheri and Faghih
(2012), who assumed a broader approach to the construct of self-esteem, and took
into consideration its global, specific and task dimensions. They applied a
self-esteem questionnaire by Heyde (1979) comprising sections on the three
dimensions mentioned and a TOEFL reading comprehension test. Only specific and
task self-esteem were proved to correlate positively (albeit weakly) with reading
achievement. Presumably, learners with higher self-regard in the FL domain keep
struggling when they face a reading comprehension difficulty, and, consequently,
they obtain better results. Low self-esteem ones have to deal with anxiety and
pessimistic outlook on academic striving, and additionally, feel less satisfaction or

self-esteem boost from their progress.
In the light of the findings quoted above, it appears only natural to assume that
attainment in listening comprehension is significantly influenced by self-esteem.
The assumption was confirmed by Hayati and Ostadian (2008), who selected 80
Iranian university students attending courses in English and calculated the corre-
lation between the results of a TOEFL listening comprehension test and
Coopersmith’s Self-Esteem Scale (1967). The researchers explained that students
expect to succeed consistently with their self-esteem, i.e. high self-esteem ones
predict higher levels of achievement while low self-esteem individuals expect to
fail. Consequently, high self-esteem individuals will try to succeed in their tasks by
exerting themselves.
Another interesting self-related research area relevant to SLA is the prediction of
FL self-esteem (self-concept) and learning strategies. McInerney, Cheng, Mok, and
Lam (2012) defined learning strategies as ways in which students engage in
learning tasks, and emphasized that they are one of the factors critical to academic
achievement. For the purposes of their research they followed the division into deep
and surface strategies by Kember et al. (in McInerney et al., 2012). Briefly, deep
strategies are applied by learners who engage deeply in learning, relate new
knowledge with previously gained one, and pursue mastery. Surface strategies can
be identified in learners who are interested only in bare essentials and do not seek
thorough understanding. The goals of the surface learners are limited to fulfilling
basic demands of the teacher such as getting the current demands done with
minimal effort. The study was conducted in 16 secondary schools in Hong Kong, in
class 7th, 8th and 9th (N = 8.354). The measure instruments utilized were the
Academic Self-Description Questionnaire by Marsh, the Learning Process
Questionnaire by Biggs and English Language Ability Calibrated by Lee (all cited
in McInerney et al., 2012). The findings showed that high English self-esteem was
associated with an increased use of deep learning strategies. An important impli-
cation was that enhancing students’ use of deep learning strategies may increase
their self-views. The results also suggested that emphasizing surface learning would
account for diminished specific self-esteem. Additionally, the statistic computations
revealed that the learners who were deep strategy users had higher achievement in
English. This effect was mediated by English self-esteem. It was concluded that
learners should be encouraged and trained to use deep learning strategies that relate
learning to daily life, organize information and involve some metacognitive skills
(note taking, self-questioning, etc.). The understanding of the linkage between the
sense of worthiness and the use of language learning strategies can be broadened by
considering the results of the study by Asadifard and Biria (2013), whose focal
construct was global self-esteem. The study involved college students of English as
a foreign language, and the data were collected by means of the Rosenberg
Self-Esteem Scale (1965) and Oxford’s Strategy Inventory for Language Learning
(in Asadifard & Biria, 2013). The strongest positive correlation was found between
cognitive and compensation strategies and self-esteem, while the weakest one
existed between the affective strategies and self-esteem. The researchers concluded
that learners who value themselves more favourably tend to rely primarily on their
mental capabilities while learning. Another implication of the study is that
improving learners’ self-regard and their language learning strategies may have a
mutual boosting effect on FL achievement.
The above mentioned findings partially corroborate those obtained by Mills,
Pajares, and Herron (2007). As a matter of fact, the object of the study was
self-efficacy, (which is a construct closely related to self-esteem) researched in the
perspective of learners’ academic attainment. More specifically, the students were
supposed to self-report whether they perceived themselves as capable of using
effective metacognitive learning strategies. The participants were college 95 inter-
mediate students of French at three institutions of higher education in the United
States. The measure was a survey including separate components concerning
self-efficacy, French learning self-concept, French learning anxiety and some other
areas. It was found that students’ self-efficacy for strategy use was an important
predictor of intermediate language achievement. Actually, the variable turned out to
be a stronger predictor than French self-concept or reading and listening anxiety.
The studies reported above (see Table 2.4) testify that the issue of self-esteem is
meaningful in the context of FL performance. The regard in which a learner holds
Table 2.4 Review of the selected research into the linkage between self-esteem in multidimen-
sional perspective and various aspects of foreign language learning
Heyde (1979) To assess the relationship between • All dimensions of self-esteem
oral production and global, correlate with oral production,
situational and task self-esteem task self-esteem more significantly
than the remaining two
Badran (2001) To determine if writing self-esteem • There is a negative correlation
and writing apprehension correlate between writing self-esteem and
with the quality and quantity of writing apprehension
writing • Writing self-esteem correlates
positively with the quality of
writing but does not influence the
quantity
Mills et al. (2007) To evaluate the relationship • Self-efficacy for strategy use is a
between self-efficacy, using predictor of language achievement
metacognitive strategies and
language achievement
Al-Hattab (2006) To explore the correlation between • Specific and task-self-esteem
global, specific and task self-esteem correlates with writing attainment,
and achievement in writing while global self-esteem does not
Hayati and Ostadian (2008) To investigate the link between • Listening comprehension is
self-esteem and listening significantly influenced by
comprehension self-esteem
Niki Maleki and Mohammadi To assess the relation between • Global self-esteem positively
(2009) global self-esteem and oral correlates with spoken
performance performance
(continued)

Koosha et al. (2011) To check if different aspects of oral • Fluency is the aspect whose
performance are influenced by correlation with self-esteem is the
self-esteem highest; accuracy, pronunciation,
vocabulary, comprehensibility
correlate insignificantly
Kartal (2011) To explore the relation between • Positive correlation in one
self-views and attitudes to reading population of subjects (English
teacher trainees)
• No significant correlation in
French and German trainee groups
Zare and Riasati (2012) To explore whether self-esteem and • Low self-esteem is accompanied
language anxiety are interrelated by high language anxiety
Rashidi et al. (2012) To assess the influence of • The decrease in self-esteem is
self-esteem on communication associated with the increase in
apprehension communication apprehension
McInerney et al. (2012) To evaluate the effect of language • High English self-concept is
self-esteem (self-concept) on associated with more frequent use
learning strategies of deep learning strategies
responsible for higher attainment
in L2
• Surface learning strategies
correlate with lower self-concept
Asadifard and Biria (2013) To evaluate the effect of self-esteem • Cognitive and compensation
on language learning strategies strategies correlate with
self-esteem more significantly
than affective strategies
him/herself exerts an influence on the quality of oral production, particularly the

fluency aspect (Koosha et al., 2011; Niki Maleki & Mohammadi, 2009). The
strongest correlation occurs between task self-esteem and speaking (Heyde in
Nogueras, 1996), which means that the confidence in one’s ability to carry out a
speech act is conducive to success in it. Language anxiety, which is related to
self-esteem, impairs the willingness to communicate, and, in consequence, causes
oral skills to deteriorate (Rashidi et al., 2012). Similarly, the remaining skills,
including the productive one such as writing (Badran, 2001) and the receptive ones
such as listening (Hayati & Ostadian, 2008) and reading (Bagheri & Faghih, 2012;
Kartal, 2011) are affected by an individual’s self-views. More often than not, the
correlation is significant between specific self-esteem and performance (Al-Hattab,
2006; Kartal, 2011). Better achievement in all the linguistic skills can be accounted
for by the finding that positive self-views go together with more efficient use of
language learning strategies (McInerney et al., 2012; Asadifard & Biria, 2013). All
in all, people high in self-esteem dare to experiment in FL, and achieve more in
many aspects of it.
The chapter was an attempt at outlining the results of empirical research into
self-esteem in its multidimensional perspective. For the purposes of the current
work mostly the studies bearing some relevance to educational context were taken
into consideration. Following a brief analysis of issues connected with assessing
self-esteem, such as diversity of definitions of the construct or optimizing the
objectivity of results, there are sections devoted to the correlations between the
focal construct and aspects of psychological functioning such as social interactions,
creativity or antisocial behaviour. High self-esteem was associated with social
acceptance and creativity while low self-views correlated with difficulty in speaking
one’ mind out and weaker leadership instincts. The findings indicate that enhancing
self-esteem in school settings is bound to produce highly desirable results for a
learner, who will enjoy more popularity, eagerly participate in group interaction and
contribute more ideas in an uninhibited way. As for the interaction between learner
self-beliefs and academic achievement, the results are rather inconclusive. A more
significant correlation was detected between specific facets of self-esteem and
attainment, however, it was claimed to fluctuate with changing age. While there is
abundant literature on the role of self-esteem in psychological functioning and
learning in general, few studies have been conducted on its effect on learning a
foreign language. What has been proved is that self-concept tends to increase
robustly with time in lower achieving, homogenous groups. Higher achievers have
proportionately higher self-views but they do not change as dynamically. An
important correlate of self-concept is learning motivation. The general conclusion
based on research outcomes is that performance in a language class (and beyond) is
enhanced by positive self-perceptions. Language anxiety is lower, willingness to
communicate, attitudes to reading and writing are more positive. Given the relative
scarcity of research into self-esteem issues in SLA, there is a need to expand the
understanding of the matter for the sake of optimizing the effects of the uphill task
that language learning may be. The question whether (and how strongly) learner
self-esteem is related with growing competence still remains only partially
answered. The changes in this relation in the most dynamic period of life, that is
from adolescence till young adulthood also need to be explored more thoroughly.
Language learning is far more ego-involving than other fields of study and
self-esteem can be viewed as a vehicle for enhancing its efficiency and personal
development. In Poland the role of self-esteem in language acquisition remains
comparatively unexplored and culturally appropriate guidance in this respect may
prove insightful. The aim of the next chapter is to present the research on the
interdependence between language attainment and self-esteem in its specific
dimension carried out for the purposes of the current volume.
Chapter 3
Research Methodology and Results
The chapter gives an account of the empirical research carried out for the purpose of
this book, aimed at exploring the relationship between foreign language self esteem
and the length and intensity of one’s learning experience, as well as some crucial
aspects of foreign language learning. In the initial part it presents the major and
specific aims of the research, to be followed by the description of the participants
and the methods. The final sections depict the results of the study.
3.1 Rationale for the Study
The role of FL learner self-esteem has not received a great deal of educationalists’
attention to date despite its irrevocable importance for the ultimate learning out-
comes (Du, 2012; Naouel, 2015). Despite a valuable contribution to the under-
standing of the construct made by Psychology (e.g. Baumeister 2005; Branden,
1995) many questions about L2 self-esteem remain unanswered. It is partly due to
difficulty in defining the variables accurately and designing a valid measurement
instrument that will not contain too many items. Besides, many psychological
studies are based on psychometric tests that do not offer any contextualized
understanding of the construct (Mercer, 2011). This book aims at shedding more
light on it in very real and varied contexts, in the hope of exploiting its assumed
explanatory power in relating various aspects of learner behaviours. Given rather
scant regard paid to learner self-esteem in the Polish educational research and
inconclusive results, undertaking an attempt at an empirical study into its role
appeared to be worthwhile. Above all, it needs to be mentioned that there has been
virtually no research done on the role of self-esteem in the area of foreign language
learning in Poland to the author’s knowledge. This study sought to contribute to
filling (at least partially) the gap, and, thereby expand the understanding of the
complexity of L2-learning process in Polish students. One of its main objectives
was to conduct a comprehensive research placing the construct within a wider
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-75283-9_3
78 3 Research Methodology and Results
social, psychological and educational background—wide enough to explore its

level in Polish students, its dynamic nature and its interaction with other factors,
such as learning beliefs, language anxiety or motivation, etc., whose role in SLA
has been explored more thoroughly. Providing penetrating insights into student
self-perceptions in the course of secondary and college education, which is
accompanied by pubertal changes and school transitions, was regarded as partic-
ularly worthy of notice. The topic of this cross-cutting study, its objectives and
scope were hoped to make it a pioneering, breakthrough undertaking for under-
standing the importance of one of the main affective factors in SLA in the Polish
educational reality and its weighty pedagogical implications.
To explain the importance of learner self-esteem, it ought to be emphasized that
the way learners perceive themselves is inextricably connected with the confidence
and motivation they need in order to engage in and achieve educational goals.
Besides, it is associated with independence, responsibility, readiness for new
challenges and the ability to cope with frustration or resist to peer pressure.
Learners who enjoy high selfesteem are more capable of handling positive and
negative emotions, and they are willing to provide assistance to others. It can be
concluded that, by possessing such educationally-significant qualities, they simply
make good learners (Ferkany, 2008).
As mentioned before, the construct seems not to have captured sufficient
attention in the realm of education (Rubio, 2007), and, by the same token, its
relevance for the Polish context has not been researched thoroughly. One of the
rather few studies into the relationship between self-esteem and general academic
achievement worth mentioning here is the one conducted by Sikorski (1997), that
proved a positive correlation between the two variables in secondary students, or
another one by Furmańska (2001), which revealed no interaction between
self-esteem and achievement in early adolescents.
As claimed in Chap. 1, self-esteem is a predictor of positive life outcomes
achieved in various life measures, such as occupation, affect, relationships,
depression and overall health (Orth, Robins, & Meier, 2011). Thereby, it con-
tributes to mental well-being, happiness, coping, and success (Baumeister,
Campbell, Krueger, & Vohs, 2003). Not only does one’s sense of selfworth affect
decisions and actions undertaken in the present circumstances, but also the ways
that an individual interprets their past experience or the goals set for the future. Due
to their universality, the outcomes of self-esteem bear obvious relevance in the
realm of education. Theorists and practitioners agree that the way an individual
learner feels about themselves translates into the amount of their commitment and
dedication to learning (Dewaele, 2011; Lyubomirsky et al., 2005; McElwain,
Booth-LaForce, Lansford, Wu, & Dyer, 2008; Rowe, Stewart, & Patterson, 2007).
As a matter of fact, the literature of the subject features unanimous agreement that
the role of self-esteem in academic attainment is vital (Aryana, 2010; Crocker &
Wolfe, 2001; Rosenberg, Schooler, Schoenbach, & Rosenberg, 1995). It determines
the goals the learners set to themselves, their motivation, their sense of agency and
their engagement in day-by-day study (Mercer, 2011). At this point, it is worth
reminding the distinction between the concept of global self-esteem, which is the
3.1 Rationale for the Study 79
individual’s positive or negative attitude toward the self as a totality, and specific
self-esteem, which is how the individual perceives themselves in a particular
domain (Rosenberg, 1965). There is a school of thought according to which specific
behaviour is best predicted by specific self-esteem (Marsh & Craven, 2006;
Rosenberg et al., 1995). A holder of high foreign language self-esteem enjoys the
feeling of confidence that makes them feel in control of their attainment. It increases
both the energy expended in learning the foreign language and the positive feelings
towards one’s abilities and competence. Those who regard themselves as good
language learners are far more likely to engage in language learning behaviours that
lead to progress (Iwaniec, 2014). Therefore, the more learners believe in them-
selves, the more they will achieve, undisturbed by possible momentary failures, but
confident that they will reach their specified accomplishment levels. In contrast, low
FLSE students may underestimate their skills, avoid public performance, and
thereby lose opportunities for practice and positive feedback. They can also be
over-reliant on the teacher’s or classmates’ appraisal.
Pubertal and post-pubertal years are characterized by a remarkable decrease in
self-worth (both in its global and specific facets), followed by a gradual rise in early
twenties. The academic domain is the one that sees a particularly notable decrease
(Marjoribanks & Mboya, 2001). The turbulent period of adolescence is also
accompanied by educational transitions (at least in the Polish system of education)
and, what follows, changing the social environment.
To begin with, around the age of 12–13, an individual separates from childhood,
and changes schools for the first time. In their mid-teens students meet their new,
lower secondary teachers and classmates, build their own image and position in the
group, start learning new subjects, and become more and more aware of their
academic strengths and weaknesses. At the age of 16, at the turn of lower secondary
and upper secondary school, there are exams to take, whose results stream the
students into more or less popular schools and classes. Then, again at the age of 19
students have to rise to the challenge of secondary school-leaving exams, which
have got far-reaching consequences as their results determine whether the student
will be admitted to the university or college that they have chosen. The pressure of
the exams and the frequent necessity to change the school environment and having
to function in a new social group may be a source of increased tension and vul-
nerability to self-image distortions. At the end of secondary education, a student
who lives away from a major academic centre, is likely to face the prospect of
leaving home to start an increasingly independent life. All the changes and tran-
sitions described above carry a risk of destabilizing the psychological functioning
equilibrium of a student and may become a threat to self-esteem, both in the global
and specific perspective, as they are laden with major decision making, social and
other adolescence-related challenges.
Another vital determinant of the self-image that is prone to fluctuations in
adolescent years is social acceptance (Cooley in Coopersmith, 1967; Crozier,
1997). Adolescents are extremely concerned with being viewed positively by
others, which helps them develop a sound level of self-esteem, essential to their
crystallizing identity. As they spend more time with peers than children, the
opinions of peers have more importance during adolescence than in the earlier years
of life (Brown & Larson in Tahir & Inam, 2015). A majority of the time spent with
peers is in school settings, so peer influence is likely to affect academic or subject
related self-esteem. Additionally, it needs to be reminded here that the experience of
school foreign language learning, more than learning other subjects, affects the self.
It involves self-presentation, identity issues, and, above all, the necessity to express
oneself in the language one does not feel fully competent in. Many learners feel that
they are not able to be themselves, especially when they have to perform orally in
L2, which may seem an imperfect tool (Horwitz, 2008). In some cases, the learner
may feel that they appear foolish and their self-image can be markedly harmed
(Arnold, 2007; Horwitz, 2008; Mercer, 2011). It cannot be taken for granted,
though, that more advanced learners have higher self-confidence in L2. Possibly,
the more advanced they are, the more sensitive to the differences between their true
self and its “L2 version” they become.
All things considered, frequent changes of educational settings and the ego
involving nature of foreign language learning experienced by young people in
Poland present a challenge to their self-views, either global or domain-related, and
it seems worth exploring whether they affect the way Polish adolescent and young
adult (lower/upper secondary and college) students perceive themselves. Given the
weighty role of the focal construct, adolescent emotional volatility and turbulent
school experience, the study set out to give an insight into the dynamics of foreign
language self-esteem in relation to changing proficiency, operationalized as longer
or more intensive learning experience, higher self-assessment and higher achieve-
ment in L2 (measured by grades). Consequently, the following research question
was posed:
RQ1: What is the dynamics of learner foreign language self-esteem in secondary
(lower and higher) and tertiary education?
Furthermore, the study was designed to cast a new light on selected SLA-related
correlates of the construct crucial to personal and academic growth. As a range of
vital aspects of language learning from the cognitive and affective domain are
presumed to be related to FLSE, delineating specific correlates of foreign language
self-esteem is expected to broaden the understanding of its interaction with them.
A relatively comprehensive view of the correlates will hopefully create new
opportunities to assume a more balanced approach to L2 learning, which, as it has
been emphasized in the book, is a combination of concomitant cognitive and
affective processes. The selection of the correlating constructs is well-grounded in
the literature of the subject reviewed in the theoretical parts of the book. More
specifically, it was driven by their sheer relevance and explanatory power in the
context of success or failure in SLA.
The first proposed correlate of FLSE is learner global self-esteem. It has been
emphasized many times within the book that its prevalence in learning-related
behaviours is undeniable (Booth, 2011). There is also some evidence for an
interrelationship between self-esteem and academic performance (Saebi, 2011). In
particular, global selfesteem is mediated by domain-specific self-esteem (FLSE),
while domain-specific selfesteem is correlated with academic achievement, and the
latter two are mutually reinforcing constructs (Marsh & Craven, 2006; Rosenberg
et al., 1995). In the light of the above considerations the research sought to answer
the question whether there is any relationship between global and specific
self-views, both of which have been claimed to interact with educational attainment,
likewise with FL attainment.
Furthermore, there was an investigation into demographic information about the
informants, such as gender or place of residence, both of which were claimed in
Sect. 1.5 to be meaningful in the context of FLSE (De Fraine et al., 2007; Gentile,
Grabe, Dolan-Pascoe, Twenge, & Wells, 2009). In accordance with the theoretical
models, adolescent girls are prone to more fluctuations of the sense of
self-worthiness than their male peers. There is no agreement, though, whether boys
actually outdo girls in this respect. It has been propounded both that female students
are likely to have lower FLSE than male students (Harter, 1993; Sullivan, 2009),
and that gender does not have an impact on self-esteem (Teoh & Nur Afiqah, 2010).
Regarding domain-specific self-esteem, it has been proved to be related to math-
ematical skills in adolescent males, and to verbal skills in females (Harter, 1999;
Marsh, 1989 in Manning, Bear, & Minke, 2006). In the light of the rather tangled
claims, it seems worth raising the question about the differences in FLSE of Polish
adolescent and young adult female and male students.
Likewise, the place of residence is inferably an influential factor in shaping
learner self-views. Specifically, for various reasons, students from rural background
are likely to suffer from less self-confidence in educational strivings than those who
live in large cities (Bogdan, 2011). As far as the demographic correlates are con-
cerned, the role of significant others in building FLSE also needs to come under
scrutiny, as it was claimed in Sect. 1.9 to be formative for the construct. It is
assumed that learners who report having a close family member who speaks L2
may have higher FLSE than those who deny having relatives who know L2.
In addition, selected factors from educational domain, such as the attitude to the
teacher (another significant person in the context) or participation in beyond-school
activities are regarded as pertinent to specific self-esteem (Chen, Yeh, Hwang, &
Lin, 2013; Sanchez & Rhoda, 2003). In relation to the former aspect, the research
aimed at verifying the assumption that students who like their teachers of English
have higher FLSE than those who dislike them. In turn, participation in extracur-
ricular activities allows adolescents for self-assessment beyond school. Such
activities may provide them with some space for defining their identities on which
to build self-esteem and give adolescents room to grow (Kort-Butler & Hageven,
2011). The study sought to verify the view that students who attend extracurricular
activities in English are likely to report higher FLSE in comparison to those who do
not.
Among the educational correlates, it seems worthwhile to identify several
variables that can help predict the level of FLSE. In an attempt to identify the most
powerful factors (whose role in SLA has been recognized and attested) which
presumably interact with FLSE, the theoretical models presented in Chap. 1
introduced the Ideal L2-Self, language anxiety, learning beliefs and learning
strategies. The first of them, i.e. the Ideal L2-Self refers to a self-dimension with a
great L2-motivating potential (Dörnyei, 2009), thereby crucial to the rate and
success in foreign language learning. It primarily triggers the need to initiate L2
learning and later acts as the driving force to sustain the long-termed learning
process. Most modern researchers have viewed domain-specific self-esteem as
interwoven with the stimuli that drive individuals and direct their actions, based on
the claim that the self is at the core of human experience and must appear in any
theoretical formulation in the area of human motivation, and vice versa (Lyons,
2014; Marsh, 1989; Trautwein, Lüdtke, Köller, & Baumer, 2009). Solid motivation
can partially compensate for insufficient aptitude or poor learning conditions
(Dörnyei, 1998). In the light of the above considerations, it can be inferred that a
learner with a low inner drive that would urge him/her to learn may well be
characterized with low FLSE. On the contrary, a learner possessing a positive
attitude to learning experience and persistence regardless of temporary setbacks is
likely to enjoy a more solid L2-related confidence. The study set out to support the
view that a learner who reports higher Ideal L2-Self is possibly higher in FLSE in
comparison to his/her lower Ideal L2-Self counterpart.
Another factor, which is intertwined with the key construct is foreign language
anxiety, that may play havoc with the outcomes of learning (Avila, 2007;
Piechurska-Kuciel, 2008) and is responsible for students’ negative emotional
reactions to language learning. Its negative impact may be observable in the level of
participation, quality of performance and learner self-confidence. People who are
doubtful about their merits (low self-esteem) are likely to suffer from negative
affect, which, among other symptoms, is characterized by the feeling of anxiety
(Horwitz, 1995). They may fear manifesting their incompetence and receiving
criticism. Therefore, low FLSE can be considered as a major threat to uninhibited
classroom practice, particularly in speaking. Teachers and instructors should be
aware of the fact that the classes they meet may comprise the withdrawn holders of
low selfregard (possibly missing their opportunities to practice), side by side with
the confident, healthy self-concept ones who will not avoid risk taking, and, con-
sequently, enjoy more ego-boosting L2 development. The study addressed the
question of the relationship between the two constructs by postulating the claim that
students who have high levels of language anxiety can have lower FLSE than those
who report lower anxiety.
Apart from motivation and anxiety, an aspect of learning whose relationship
with FLSE is worth investigating is language learning beliefs (see: Sect. 1.9), that
strongly influence learner consciousness (Manzanaresis & Murphy, 2010). It is
worth reminding that their effect on language learning is manifold—they can have
an impact on motivation, performance in class or even cause anxiety when a learner
clings to some unrealistic ones (ibid). Students may be directly influenced by their
perception of success in learning and levels of expectancy (their beliefs about the
abilities and responsibilities to perform tasks). When the level of expectancy is
realistically high it helps to build confidence, when it is low or unrealistically high,
it contributes to building incompetence (Bernat & Gvozdenko, 2005). High FLSE
learners may naturally adhere to positive and supportive ones such as “I have a
good ear for pronunciation,” while low FLSE ones may hold on to frustrating,
demotivating and anxiety-causing assumptions (cf. “I’ll never learn to speak flu-
ently”). The research tries to establish whether learning beliefs are predictors of
high or low FLSE.
Apparently, there is also some interplay between FLSE and learning strategies,
which account for efficiency in SLA (McInerney, Wing-yi Cheng, Mo Ching Mok,
& Kwok Hap Lam, 2012). Self-esteem has a direct impact on information pro-
cessing, metacognitive knowledge and, supposedly, on the use of learning strategies
(Mercer, 2011), which may be considered as a predictor of language achievement.
Learners with poor L2 self-esteem can possibly use fewer strategies or rely on the
less effective ones than learners with high sense of L2 self-concept. Meanwhile,
high-achieving students have been proved to employ a large number of different
strategies in seeking, organizing, recording information than low-achieving ones
(Oxford, 2003). For the purpose of the book, the linkage between the application of
strategies and FLSE was defined in the following way: students with high foreign
language self-esteem have different language learning strategies from students with
low foreign language self-esteem. In the light of the considerations presented
above, the study aspired to clarify the answer to the following general question:
RQ2: What are the most powerful correlates and predictors of FLSE?
The research also aimed to elaborate on the profile of a learner who is high/low
in FLSE. As described in Sect. 2.4, there are certain characteristic features that may
be ascribed to both types. An overview of high and low self-esteem-learner traits
and behaviours was hoped to make the analyses of the main findings more valid as
well as help portray a person who represents one of the extreme ends of the FLSE
continuum. Consequently, it may help educationalists optimize their practices
towards more learner friendly, ego-enhancing classroom teaching. For instance,
understanding the relationship between learner willingness to speak in public and
their foreign language self-views could help identify learners who are more likely to
be in need of teacher support (see Sect. 2.4). Moreover, what every practitioner
should be aware of is that low FLSE may interact with student’s attitude to L2 and
achievement (Liu, 2008). As indicated in Sect. 2.3, it may also affect (or be affected
by) the rapport between the teacher and the class, beginning from the first day of
school experience. Furthermore, one can expect some kind of correlation between
the focal construct and selected personality traits such as shyness or popularity
(Maner & Park, 2009; Wong, Wiest, & Cusick, 2002).
3.2 Method
3.2.1 Participants
There were 381 participants representing secondary (low and high) and tertiary
levels of education. The sample comprised students from lower and upper sec-
ondary school and college/university students. For the research purposes, in order to
distinguish appropriately between the length of exposure, they were all in 3 groups
Table 3.1 Demographic characteristics of the sample (N = 381)

Variable N %
Gender Female 227 59.6
Male 154 40.4
Place of residence Village 70 18.4
Town 174 45.7
City 137 36.0
Siblings Yes 329 86.4
Close relatives who speak English Yes 195 51.2
Positive attitude to English teacher Yes 303 79.5
Extracurricular activities in English Yes 142 37.3
representing the third year of study at their respective stages—3rd form-lower

secondary (called LS), 3rd form-upper secondary (US) and 3rd year-college or
university students (CS). In order to distinguish between the levels of English
within each educational stage, the three cohorts comprised groups following either
extended or non-extended courses of English. As gender was claimed to be relevant
to self-esteem, the proportions between female and male respondents in the whole
sample are worth reporting—there were 227 female and 154 male students (see
Table 3.1 for a summary of demographic characteristics). The place of residence
was another criterion according to which the participants were divided. There were
137 people who came from villages, 174 from towns and 70 from cities. The
analyses were also related to the question whether there was anybody in close
family who spoke English. It was found that 186 participants had close relatives
who spoke English and 195 did not. Speaking of the role of significant others in
foreign language self-esteem formation, the sample was divided according to
whether they liked their teachers of English. There were 310 who claimed they did
and 71 who denied it. Close to positive rapport with the teacher may seem the
participation in extra activities in English which was declared by 142 students and
denied by 239. Following the issue of extracurricular work it seems worth distin-
guishing between those who said they liked English (N = 303), and those who
stated they did not (N = 78).
Summing up, every wave representing one level of education was divided
according to proficiency into the basic/non-extended (poziom podstawowy) and the
intensive/extended (poziom rozszerzony) cohorts. Accordingly, there were six
groups altogether—two groups representing different proficiency in English at each
of the three stages: low level lower secondary (LLS) versus high level lower
secondary (HLS); low level upper secondary (LUS) versus high level upper sec-
ondary (HUS); low level college (LCS) versus high level college (HCS).
The LS wave (N = 126), accommodated 3rd form, lower secondary (gimnazjum)
students, aged between 14 and 15, all from schools in Krosno a town in the
south-east of Poland, with a population of 47,000. They recruited from The
Catholic Lower Secondary School, The Bilingual Lower Secondary School and
3.2 Method 85
The Lower Secondary School No. 4. The proportion of gender was quite balanced
as there were 64 female and 62 male students. As many as 33 of them reported a
village as their place of residence, 87 lived in a town, while 6 claimed to live in a
city. 71 of them reported having a relative who spoke English, 65 said they liked
their teachers of English, 37 attended extracurricular activities in English, 100 liked
English. The LS cohort was divided into lower and higher proficiency groups.
There were 62 students following a standard course of English, i.e. three lessons of
English a week (LLS). They represented level B1 in English according to Common
European Framework of Reference for Languages. They all attended The Lower
Secondary School No. 4 in Krosno, and they were from classes 3A, 3B and 3D (24,
13 and 25 participants respectively). Meanwhile, the other part of the LS cohort was
constituted by students (N = 64) who followed an extended course of English, i.e.
five lessons per week, and they represented level B1+/B2 according to CEFR
(HLS). 39 participants were from classes 3A and 3B (15 and 24 students) of The
Bilingual Lower Secondary School in Krosno, while the remaining 25 were from
classes 3A (10 students) and 3B (15 students) of The Catholic Lower Secondary
School in Krosno.
The upper secondary (US) informants (N = 126), who were 17–18 years of age,
recruited from The Nicolaus Copernicus Secondary School No. 1, The Secondary
School No. 2, The Catholic Upper Secondary School, all of which are also in
Krosno. The group comprised 74 males and 52 females; and their places of resi-
dence were: villages—55; towns—66, cities—5. 62 of them reported having a
relative who spoke English, 110 admitted they liked their teachers of English, 84
took part in extra activities in English, 98 liked English. Analogically with the LS,
the HS cohort was divided into lower and higher proficiency groups. The lower
proficiency group consisted of 65 students following a non-extended course of
English, i.e. 3 lessons per week (LUS), and their level of proficiency could be
marked as B1+. They were from The Secondary School No. 2 in Krosno—classes
3A (mathematical-physical), 3B (pro-medical) and 3C (economic) (30, 14, 21
students). The higher proficiency section (HUS) consisted of 61 students from The
Nicholaus Copernicus Secondary School No. 1 in Krosno (20 students from class
3C—mathematical-physical with extended English), The Secondary School
No. 2 in Krosno (22 students from class 3D—humanistic), and The Catholic Upper
Secondary School in Krosno (19 students from class 3—pro-medical). They had
five lessons of English per week, and their level, according to CEFR, could be
described as B2+.
The tertiary participants (CS) were from three institutions of higher education
(N = 129). Their age ranged between 21 and 40, and there were 40 males and 89
females. 49 people inhabited villages with a population of up to 2,500, 21 lived in
towns, and 59 lived in cities with a population of over 50,000. 53 informants
reported having a close family member who spoke English, 130 said they liked their
teachers of English, 21 took part in extracurricular activities in English, 105 liked
English. Like the other two waves, the CS group was divided into lower and higher
proficiency cohorts. The first one (N = 65), which comprised the lower proficiency
group (LCS) came from The State College of Krosno, the Management and
Information Technologies Departments (48 and 17 students respectively). The HCS

part of the tertiary cohort (N = 64) contained students from the Departments of
English at the Jagiellonian (29 students) and Pedagogical Universities (35 students)
in Cracow. LCS had a compulsory course of a foreign language (English) towards
level B2 for 90 min a week, whereas HCS, majoring in English had most of their
courses in L2, and their level should be described as C1.
On the basis of the results of Foreign Language Self-Esteem Scale (adapted from
Liu & Wang, 2005), the results of the whole sample were ranked, and the maximum
and minimum results were identified. Following that, ten selected holders of
extreme results were interviewed with a view to a better understanding of the
antecedents and outcomes of extreme levels of the focal construct. The batch
comprised five interviewees with maximum and five interviewees with minimum
scores. The interviewees with the lowest results in FLSE obtained from 14 to 17
points on a scale from 0 to 40. There were two females and three males, two of
whom were LLS, another two were LUS students, and one was a LCS. Their
achievement in English was largely below average, and so was their general aca-
demic achievement (with one exception). Their self-assessment of skills in English,
likewise, was rather low, except for that of one student which was good. All of them
assessed their speaking skills as the weakest. The informant with the lowest score
(14) was a male representative of LUS, aged 18 (Wiktor). According to the
demographic information, he came from a village with the population up to 2,500
inhabitants. He reported that nobody spoke English at home, and he did not have a
positive attitude to English. He did not like his teacher of English, and he did not
attend any extracurricular activities in English His achievement in English was
rather poor (2.0), but he had a relatively high Grade Point Average (GPA), which
fell between 4.0 and 5.0. The were three interviewees holding the second lowest
FLSE value (16). One of them, holding a score of 16 in FLSE, was Karol, aged 16
(LLS). He lived in a little town, and did not have any close family members that
spoke English. He was not fond of English and did not have a liking for the teacher
of the language. Like the other people in the low FLSE cohort, he did not partake in
any extracurricular activities in English. His GPA was ca 3.0, but his self-reported
final grade in English was 4.0. Another score of 16 was held by a LUS interviewee,
aged 19 (Dawid). His reported place of residence was a town. At home nobody
spoke English. He admitted he did not enjoy English at school, and he claimed to
dislike the teacher. He denied participation in any additional activities in English.
Neither his GPA nor his final grade in English exceeded the level of 3.0. The last
score of 16 was obtained by Kornelia, aged 22 (LCS), who lived in a little place
with a population of less than 2,500. She claimed she had a close relative who
spoke English. Like the other low FLSE interviewees, she did not like either
English as a subject, or the teacher. She did not take part in any English classes
beyond the compulsory college course. Her end-of-term grade in English was 3.0,
while her GPA was slightly higher, i.e., it ranged from 3.5 to 4.0. The last person in
the low FLSE group was a LLS, Nikola, aged 16 (FLSE = 17). She lived in a town;
at home there were no people with the knowledge of English. She did not like
English, but she had a positive attitude to the teacher of the subject. She declined to
3.2 Method 87
attend any extracurricular L2 activities. In comparison with her GPA, which was
between 2.0 and 3.0, her achievement in English, measured by the end-of-year
grade was slightly higher as it reached 3.5.
The group of informants who had the highest FLSE scores (39–40 points on a
scale between 0 and 40) comprised one male and four female students. Amongst
them one belonged to HUS while the others to HCS. Both their self-assessment of
L2 skills and the final grades in the subject of English are high in all cases, i.e. very
good and excellent. The highest result (FLSE = 40) belonged to Kinga, aged 18
(HUS). She lived in a village, and she denied taking part in any extracurricular
activities in L2. She reported having someone at home who spoke English, and she
declared she liked both the subject and her teacher of English. She received a very
high grade (5.0) at the end of the previous term. The next interviewee, with a score
of 39 in FLSE was Kuba, aged 21 (HCS). He also lived in a little place with a
population of no more than 2,500 people. He had a near relative who spoke English.
His attitude to English and his teacher of the subject was positive. He did not attend
any extra English activities but enjoyed excellent achievement in English—in the
previous term he got the top final grade (5.0). His general academic achievement
measured by grades approaches the value of 5.0. Among the highest FLSE holders
in HCS, there was also Diana, aged 22. She came from a village, and she declined
to have anybody at home who could speak English. She liked her teachers of
Practical English. She does not attend any extracurricular English classes. Her final
grade in English was 4.0, while, according to her self-assessment, her knowledge of
English was excellent. Diana’s GPA was 4.5. Another HCS participant, called
Natalia, aged 22 (FLSE = 39), lived in a big city. She reported having family
members who spoke English. Although she admitted she liked the language, as well
as her teachers of English, she made no mention of any extra classes done beyond
the compulsory course. She regarded herself as a very good student; her achieve-
ment measured by grades was good (4.0). Her GPA was close to 5.0. The last HCS
student in the batch was Aneta, aged 22 (FLSE = 39). Her place of residence was a
major city. According to her report, somebody at home spoke English. She enjoyed
learning English and she was fond of her teachers. Although she did not report
participation in any extracurricular activities, her self-assessed command of English
was excellent; according to school assessment, it was very good. Also her GPA was
very high, i.e. very close 5.0.
3.2.2 Instruments
Two types of instruments were employed in the study, namely a questionnaire and
an interview. The questionnaire comprised several subscales in order to investigate
the focal construct of Foreign Language Self-Esteem (FLSE) and its SLA-related
correlates. Its initial part was aimed at collecting some demographic information that
is supposed to provide a wider perspective on the central construct by observing the
linkage between it and place of origin, positive attitude towards the teacher, etc.
The first section, which probed into selected demographic information about the
participants comprised 17 questions to be answered by marking the correct answer.
For instance, the informants were enquired about their gender (1—female, 2—
male); age; place of residence (1—village with a population up to 2,500; 2—town
with 2,500 to 50,000; 3—city, more than 50,000). The next items elicited infor-
mation on whether the respondents had any siblings (1—no, 2—yes) and whether
anybody at home knew English (1—no, 2 yes). There were also questions about the
length of experience with English, the attitude to the subject of English (1—
dislikes; 2—likes) and to the teacher of English (1—dislikes; 2—likes) as well as
the participation in extra-curricular activities in English (1—yes; 2—no). The final
questions were about achievement in English, more specifically about
self-assessment of performance in the four macro skills, i.e. listening, speaking,
reading and writing (1—insufficient, 2—poor, 3—sufficient, 4—good, 5—very
good, 6—excellent), and about the final grades in English obtained in the past year
of study (the grades: 1—insufficient, 2—poor, 3—sufficient, 4—good, 5—very
good, 6—excellent).
The scale which was focal in the current research was applied to measure foreign
language self-esteem of students at various ages and levels of proficiency in English.
It was adapted from Liu & Wang (2005) and piloted on 70 college students. The
pilot study was administered to a group of 60 students of English Philology, at the
State Higher Vocational School in Krosno. Among them there were 30, 24 and 20
students of the 1st, 2nd and 3rd year respectively. As it was mentioned above, the
instrument was an adapted version of the Academic Self-Concept Scale (ASC), by
Liu & Wang (2005). The original scale, which consisted of 20 items assessed
students’ feelings and perceptions about their confidence and effort, for example ‘I
am good at most of my school subjects’ (see Appendix A). The answers to the items
were given on a 4-point scale ranging from 1 to 4 (1—never, 4—always). The ten
questionnaire items for the current study were selected by observing which com-
bination of ten of them produced the highest Cronbach alpha coefficient.
Following the pilot study, the ultimate instrument for assessing FLSE (FLSE
Scale) consisted of 10 statements to be assessed on a 4-point Likert scale (1—never,
4—always)—for instance: I can follow the classes/lessons of English easily or I am
able to help my group/classmates in their English coursework or The teacher/s of
English feel/s that I am poor at my work. The negative items had to be
key-reversed, so that the high score could represent a high level of foreign language
self-esteem. The minimum/maximum score to be obtained was 10 and 40 respec-
tively. The Cronbach alpha coefficient that reflected the reliability of the scale was
a = 0.835 (see: Appendix B).
The next scale whose purpose was to scrutinize global self-esteem was
Rosenberg’s Self-Esteem Scale (1965), but unlike in the scale described above, in a
global rather than specific perspective. All items were answered using a 4-point
Likert scale format ranging from 4—strongly agree to 1—strongly disagree. Like
the previous scale, it consisted of 10 statements of the following kind: On the
whole, I am satisfied with myself or I feel that I have a number of good qualities or I
feel I do not have much to be proud of. The minimum number of points on the scale
3.2 Method 89
was 10 and the maximum was 40. The internal consistency of the measure was
a = 0.856 (see: Appendix B).
The next measure used in the research was the Ideal L2-Self Scale by Taguchi
et al. (2009). It consisted of 10 statements assessed in a 6-point Likert scale ranging
from 6—strongly agree to 1—strongly disagree. The sample statements were as
follows: I can imagine myself living abroad and having a discussion in English or
The things I want to do in the future require me to use English. The minimum score
to be obtained on the scale was 10 while the maximum was 60. The reliability
coefficient Cronbach alpha was 0.883 (see: Appendix B).
The research also comprised a measurement of Language Learning Beliefs (LLB
Scale), which was aimed at learner personal perceptions, attitudes or ‘myths’ about
the process of language learning (Zhou in Chen et al. 2013). It consisted of 11
statements that the respondents were supposed to assess on a 5-point Likert scale
from 1—I strongly disagree to 5—I strongly agree. The reliability coefficient
obtained by the scale was 0.718 (see: Appendix B).
There was also the Language Learning Strategies Scale by Kavaliauskiene et al.
(2011), whose purpose was to explore the use of metacognitive, cognitive and
social/affective strategies. It had 13 statement items such as for instance: I focus on
a specific language point at a time or I guess the meaning from context I am active
in group discussion, to be assessed by the informants on a 5-point Likert scale that
ranged from 1—I strongly disagree to 5—I strongly agree. The Cronbach alpha
computed for the scale was 0.740 (see: Appendix B).
Another instrument measuring a hypothesized correlate of foreign language
selfesteem was Public Speaking Class Anxiety Scale (PSCAS) by Yaikhong and
Usaha (2012). It was designed to measure class speaking anxiety by means of 17
diagnostic items such as I am afraid that the other students will laugh at me when I
speak English in my English class or It embarrasses me to volunteer answers in my
English class. The statements were assessed on a 5-point Likert scale from 5—I
strongly agree to 1—I strongly disagree. The negatively-worded items were
key-reversed so that a high score represented low anxiety. The Cronbach alpha
calculated for the scale was 0.955 (see: Appendix B).
The question of selected characteristic features of high and low foreign language
self-esteem learners was pursued via qualitative analyses, thus the last type of
instrument was a structured interview designed for the holders of extreme results in
the FLSE scale (see: Appendix A). The need to undertake the qualitative part of the
research in such a form grew from the belief that unrestricted by questionnaire
questions, the informants will provide valuable information about themselves, and
make the answer to RQ3 as comprehensive as possible. Thus, the study, which
contained 13 questions, aimed at examining the memories, preferences, and
inspirations related to foreign language learning. The guiding questions can be
grouped into categories such as personality, early language learning experience,
significant people, mastery experiences, achievement, etc. One of the parts, con-
tributing to the psychological portrayal of a high/low self-esteem student was
designed to explore whether they perceived themselves as popular or shy (for
example, Have you got a lot of friends or a few close, trusted ones?). Then, there
was a section concerning early L2 learning memories (for example, What are your
earliest memories of learning English?). Another part probed into the role of sig-
nificant others in learning (for instance, Is there anybody who inspires you by their
command of English?) or mastery experiences in learning (for example, Do you
remember any situation in which you spoke English and you felt proud of your
achievement?). Besides, there were questions about self-assessment (How do you
assess your performance in comparison to your classmates?), opportunities for
out-of-school practice (Do you try to practise English beyond school?) and
scholastic achievement (What is your GPA?). Additionally, with a view to
enriching the profile of a high/low FLSE learner, the interview contained a part that
referred to L1 acquisition experience its timing, special difficulties such as speech
impediments, etc. (for instance, Did you require a speech therapy?). The study into
the above mentioned aspects was hoped to contribute to more in-depth under-
standing of foreign language self-esteem boosters and hindrances.
3.2.3 Procedure
Before the study was commenced, the Heads of schools or higher education
departments had been asked for their consent after being informed about the pur-
poses and the necessary procedures in the research. In one of the lower secondary
schools the Head decided to apply in a written form for the parents’ permission.
Wherever possible, the study was administered during Information Technology
lessons or classes that took place in computer laboratories, so that the respondents
could complete the questionnaires online. Completing the online survey took ca
10 min. In the case of the university students, the questionnaires were completed in
a paper form during lectures, which gathered the largest number of people in one
hall. The administration was possible due to courtesy of colleague lecturers, who
agreed to give up some of their lecture time. The completion of the survey took 12–
15 min. The participation in the research was voluntary and free. In order to
increase the objectivity, the study was anonymous and the questionnaires were
coded. Following the pen and paper survey, the results were transferred to the
electronic form for further processing. Following the survey, the study proceeded
with the qualitative (interview) part. As for the administration, the interviews were
held in the schools and universities and took circa 15 min each. They were con-
ducted in February and March 2016. The participants were allowed to inspect the
interview questions short before the event, so that they could take an informed
decision whether to consent or not. None of the selected interviewees voiced any
hesitation at that stage, all of them agreed to participate, and the interviews pro-
ceeded as planned. The conversations were recorded and subsequently subscribed.
One of the interviewees chose to be addressed by a nickname, while the others did
not mind being called their real names.
As for the design, the study was cross-sectional, as it collected data on more than
one variable at the same time. It was also differential due to the fact that it compared
3.2 Method 91
several groups on the same dependent variable. The research was carried out in
naturalistic conditions.
In accordance with what has been mentioned in Sect. 3.2.2, the study was
carried out not only with quantitative but also with qualitative methods (triangu-
lation) in order to check the results of exploring the same subject (Graziano &
Raulin, 2012). Hence, alongside the statistical data found through quantitative
analysis, there was also descriptive data provided by the qualitative part to allow
more in-depth understanding of the construct. Qualitative research provides more
context through referring to local situations, conditions, needs of participants,
previous experience, etc. (Berg, 2012). The qualitative part of the research took the
form of an interview with ten students who obtained the highest and the lowest
scores in the FLSE scale. The procedure can be considered as case study since the
information it provides is valid for individual people and cannot be subject to
sweeping generalizations.
There were several kinds of variables defined in of the study.
The types of variables:
– dependent: foreign language self-esteem measured by the FLSE Scale
– moderator—demographic: length of exposure to English, gender, place of res-
idence, having L2-speaking close relatives,
– independent:
(a) personal: global self-esteem, measured by means of Rosenberg’s
Self-Esteem Scale, (1965); Ideal L2-Self, measured with Ideal L2-Scale
(Taguchi et al. 2009); language learning strategies, measured with
Language Learning Scale (Kavaliauskiene et al. 2011) public speaking
anxiety, measured with PSCAS (Yaikhong & Usaha, 2012); learning beliefs,
Language Learning Beliefs Scale (Zhou in Chen et al. 2013); popularity
with peers,
(b) educational: proficiency in English, achievement, rapport with the teacher,
attitude to English, participation in extra-curricular activities in English,
critical events in learning.
3.2.4 Analyses
The data obtained from the questionnaires underwent statistic analyses by means of
IBM SPSS 23.0 towards descriptive and inferential statistics.
The descriptive statistics computed for the purposes of the research were means,
i.e. the arithmetic averages; modes, i.e. the most frequent results; medians, i.e. the
middle values, and standard deviations, which depicts how far individual results
fall from the mean. Besides, minimum and maximum scores were calculated with a
view to selecting informants with extreme results for individual interviews. Other
than that, a number of correlations between the focal construct and its anticipated
correlates were obtained (largely non-parametric, c.f. Spearman’s rank correlation

coefficients) in order to observe the relationships between them. The reason for the
application of non-parametric tests was that it was not possible to assume the
Gaussian (normal) distribution of variables. The Kolmogorov-Smirnov test was
applied (to compare the set of scores in the sample to a normally distributed set of
scores with the same mean and standard deviation).
In an SPSS output, if the value in the Assymp. Sig. column, marked as p in the
further parts of the chapter, is less than 0.05 then data cannot be considered as
normally distributed and parametric tests cannot be applied, which was the case
with the data in the current research (http://changingminds.org). Additionally, the
inferential statistics was used in the study to make judgements of the probability
that an observed difference between the groups is a dependable one and is likely to
extend beyond the data obtained in the sample. One of the major statistics was
Wilcoxon t-test, which compares the means of two groups calculated for the
dependent variable (Graziano & Raulin, 2012). For instance, it enabled a com-
parison between the means of the foreign language selfesteem values for a lower
secondary, non-extended group and their extended counterparts. In order to scru-
tinize the connection between the means of more than two groups, the
Kruskal-Wallis One-Way ANOVA test was used—for example, while assessing the
differences between the results of six groups on the measurement of foreign lan-
guage self-esteem.
3.3 Results
For optimal clarity, the descriptive statistics will precede the inferential statistics.
The presentation of the results obtained will follow the chronological order of the
research questions.
3.3.1 Quantitative Findings
Each educational level was represented by a group following an intensive (ex-

tended) and a non-extended, standard course of English, and for the sake of clarity
and immediacy of various comparisons, the results of FLSE measurement in all the
cohorts are presented in Table 3.2.
Taken at face value, the figures obtained by the examination of FLSE levels
measured at subsequent stages of education (see Table 3.2) did not show any
radical or consistent increase or decrease in FLSE according to growing learning
experience. It became clear that its fluctuations had to be observed from a twofold
perspective, i.e. separately in the extended and non-extended strand. The
non-extended groups (LLS, LUS, LCS) reported the highest FLSE level (means and
medians) at the lowest stage (LLS), the values slightly lowering at the upper
3.3 Results 93
Table 3.2 FLSE values in all groups

Group Mean Median Std. deviation Minimum Maximum
LLS (N = 62) 28.31 28.50 5.479 16 39
HLS (N = 64) 31.08 31.50 4.398 17 38
LUS (N = 65) 28.29 28.00 5.584 16 38
HUS (N = 61) 29.77 30.00 5.475 14 40
LCS (N = 65) 25.98 26.00 4.894 16 37
HCS (N = 64) 32.48 32.00 3.510 22 39
Total 29.31 30.00 5.346 14 40
secondary stage (LUS), and more notably lowering at the tertiary stage (LCS). In
the extended groups (HLS, HUS, HCS), the highest FLSE levels were reported by
the tertiary group (HCS), which also revealed the least dispersion of the data values
(SD = 3,510), followed by the lower secondary (HUS) and the upper secondary
group (HUS) respectively.
In order to investigate the relationship between the length of learning experience
(which ranged from one to twenty years) and the level of foreign language
self-esteem, Spearman’s correlation was run as a statistical measure of the strength
of a monotonic relationship between two sets of data (Graziano & Raulin, 2012). It
was found that there was a positive, albeit not very strong correlation between
FLSE and the length of FL exposure (Rho = 0.147, N = 381, p = 0.002). The
computations were repeated after removing the extreme data values that might have
skewed the results. The procedure of disposing of outliers improved the magnitude
of the correlation (Rho = 0.158) (Fig. 3.1).
The Spearman correlation coefficient value is congruent with what is apparent
from the scatterplot; there appeared to be a positive correlation of moderate strength
between the two variables. Table 3.3 provides an overview of results obtained by
the six groups of participants.
As for the statistical significance of the findings on the relationship between the
length of learning experience (which ranged from one to twenty years) and the level
Fig. 3.1 FLSE and the

length of exposure for
N = 381 (linear correlation)
Table 3.3 The correlations Group Rho P

between FLSE and length of
exposure for each group LLS 0.123 0.350
HLS 0.270 0.031*
LUS 0.207 0.099
HUS 0.007 0.958
LCS 0.054 0.671
HCS 0.230 0.068
Total 0.158 0.002*
In HLS: *p < 0.05; in the total sample: *p < 0.05
of foreign language self-esteem, the p-value was less than 0.05 significance level
assumed for the data (p = 0.004), which means that the result attained statistical
significance and was not caused by sheer coincidence (see Table 3.3). The proce-
dure of disposing of outliers improved the magnitude of the correlation and the
significance level (Rho = 0.158, p = 0.002, p < 0.05). The highest correlation was
obtained by HLS (Rho = 0.270, p = 0.031), followed by HCS (Rho = 0.230,
p = 0.068), while its lowest value was observed in HUS. The correlation for the
total sample amounted to the value of Rho = 0.158, p = 0.002.
Even though, the correlation proved significant for the whole sample, the same
cannot be said about its values for the particular cohorts. Within the sample, the
positive correlation between FLSE and the length of exposure was found to be
significant (N = 64, Rho = 270, p = 0.031) only in HLS. Along these lines, stu-
dents who had a longer time of exposure to L2 had higher FLSE, and the inter-
relation between the two factors was stronger in lower secondary learners who
attended an intensive course of L2 than in other groups.
The next relationship explored in the research was the one between FLSE and
proficiency operationalized by the intensity of instruction in English. Each educa-
tional level was represented by a group following an extended and a non-extended,
standard (intensive vs. non-intensive exposure) course of English. The examination
of levels of FLSE, as shown in Table 3.2, makes it clear, that the waves repre-
senting the same level of education but varied intensity of exposure to English
produced consistent results throughout the sample. The descriptive results
demonstrated that the groups following an extended course of L2 obtained higher
mean and median values of FLSE than their non-extended counterparts. The dis-
tinction was the most striking in the college strand (l = 25.98 vs. l = 32.48), and
the least in the upper secondary one (l = 28.29 vs. l = 29.77). The highest means
were obtained by HCS (l = 32.48) and HLS (l = 31.08). The standard deviation
values were moderate for those groups (SD = 3.510; SD = 4.398), so the individual
results were less dispersed than in the remaining cohorts.
The graph below presents the findings described above in a comprehensive way,
where all the groups can be found on the scale and seen against the others
(Fig. 3.2).
3.3 Results 95
Fig. 3.2 Group FLSE
The differences between groups representing the same levels of education are
consistent the lower proficiency groups following a standard course of English were
lower in FLSE than those boasting higher proficiency in English, following an
intensive course.
In order to determine whether there were statistically significant differences
between the six groups, the Kruskal-Wallis ANOVA test was conducted. Taking
into consideration the Chi-Square value, H = 60.028 and the statistical significance
of the test p = 0.000, one can conclude that the groups varied significantly as far as
FLSE was concerned. They produced distinct scores that required further compu-
tations aimed at assessing whether the differences between the cohorts representing
the same level but varied proficiency, presented a reliable statistical value.
The optimal choice of a statistic instrument for comparing results of two inde-
pendent groups and, thereby evaluating the hypothesis that more proficient learners
held a higher FLSE distribution was Mann-Whitney U test (the data distribution
was different from normal). The test was performed for all possible pairs of data
sets, so as to receive a comprehensive outlook on the possible correlations, not only
the hypothesized ones. The results are demonstrated in Table 3.4.
The first groups that need to be compared are the LLS (N = 62) against HLS
(N = 64). The test indicated that in LHS classes FLSE was lower than in HLS
Table 3.4 The Group N Mean Sum of Z p

between-group comparison of rank ranks
FLSE at different educational
levels LLS 62 53.78 3334.50 −2.95 <0.05
HLS 64 72.91 4666.50
LUS 65 58.72 3817.00 −1.519 >0.05
HUS 61 68.59 4184.00
LCS 61 42.11 2737.00 −7.025 0.000
HCS 65 88.25 5648.00
classes (p = 0.003). The results of the test were in the expected direction and
significant, Z = −2.946, p < 0.05. LLS had an average rank of 53.78, while HLS
had an average rank of 72.91. The participants who were more advanced in L2 than
their peers had better self-views as learners.
The next pair of data sets that underwent Mann Whitney U test in order to
conduct statistic comparisons were those obtained by HUS and LUS classes. The
mean rank remaining higher for the HUS than for LUS group, the difference proved
to fail to demonstrate statistical significance (p = 0.129; Z = −1.519; p > 0.05). It
might look that higher proficiency learners represent higher FLSE, but the statistical
calculations did not legitimize the observation.
Another subgroup of informants, whose FLSE was compared in relation to
proficiency in L2 were higher education students. According to Mann Whitney U
test, there was a statistically significant difference between the scores of the two
groups (Z = −7.025, p = 0.000). The results of the cohorts were quite discrepant—
HCS were considerably higher in their L2-related self-liking than LCS.
Holding better FLSE by more proficient learners was quite symptomatic and in
accordance with the theoretical claims that underlay the research, although it needs
to be reminded that the difference between upper secondary classes did not reach
the level that would give it a status of a statistically significant one.
It may appear interesting and pertaining to the main theme, although slightly
extrapolating beyond the hypothesis in focus, but there were some other insightful
findings within the sample, which conveyed the predominance of the intensity of
exposure over the length of learning experience as factors that are related to learner
FLSE. For instance, the difference between the extended and non-extended English
learners was also examined by means of Mann Whitney U test against the time of
exposure. Interestingly, the findings remained consistent with the presumed
advantage of more proficient learners over the less proficient ones in FLSE, see
Table 3.5.
The test of differences indicated that HLS obtained higher FLSE scores than the
LUS (see Table 3.5), and the difference was statistically significant (Z = −2.857,
p = 0.004). Another comparison was made between HLS and LCS. HLS were
higher in FLSE than LCS. The difference was statistically significant (Z = −5.573,
p = 0.000, p < 0.05). The last interesting comparison was performed between HUS
Table 3.5 The Group N Mean Sum of Z p

between-group comparison of rank ranks
FLSE in extended and
non-extended groups HLS 64 74.45 4765.00 −2.857 0.004
LUS 65 55.69 3620.00
HLS 64 83.45 5340.50 −5.573 0.05
LCS 65 46.84 3044.50
HUS 61 76.65 4675.50 −3.923 0.000
LCS 65 51.16 3325.50
3.3 Results 97
and LCS. HUS revealed higher results in FLSE than the LCS, and the difference
possessed statistical significance (Z = −3.923, p = 0.000, p < 0.05, p < 0.01).
All in all, in a global perspective, the results rendered a proportionate rela-
tionship between learners’ FLSE and their level of proficiency in English conveyed
by the intensity of instruction, namely, more advanced learners were higher in
FLSE (p = 0.000, p < 0.05), which corroborates the theoretical claims postulated
for the purposes of the current research. What is more, participants of an extended
course enjoyed higher levels of FLSE than non-extended ones despite the longer of
exposure of the latter. Summing up, growing proficiency in L2 resulted in more
substantial enhancement of FLSE than the length of learning experience.
Another dimension of proficiency was students’ self-assessment from a sub-
jective and objective perspective. Given the theoretical grounds, it was investigated
whether students with higher achievement in FL (self-assessed) had higher foreign
language self-esteem than those with lower achievement. The computation was
performed for the whole sample. The correlation between FLSE and aggregated
self-assessment of four macro skills in L2 was found to be positive (Rho = 0.795,
p = 0.000) which was the assertion of the claim that the higher a learner was in
FLSE, the higher their self-assessed proficiency in L2 was. The linear regression
computed for the predictor variable, i.e. self-assessment of skills and the response
variable proved that an increase in self assessment concurred with an increase in
FLSE by 1.05 of a point (FLSE = 12.08 + 1.05x). The predictor value of
self-assessment was 62.4. The relationship is represented graphically in Fig. 3.3.
The measurement of proficiency was also represented by separate
self-assessment of the four macro-skills. Its relationship with FLSE was scrutinized
for the whole sample, analogically as in the case of aggregated assessment. The
distribution of marks is presented in Table 3.6.
Fig. 3.3 The relationship

between FLSE and
aggregated assessment of
skills
Table 3.6 Self-assessment of four macro skills (N = 381)

Self-assessment (mark) Listening % Speaking % Reading % Writing %
1 3.4 1.3 0.8 1.6
2 8.4 7.6 3.7 9.6
3 20.2 25.7 12.3 19.7
4 28.3 35.7 34.6 39.1
5 29.7 23.4 36.0 21.0
6 10.0 6.3 12.6 11.0
Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
Table 3.7 Correlations of FLSE and FL achievement in four macro skills for the whole sample
Variable Correlation p
Self-assessment of listening 0.705 0.000
Self-assessment of reading 0.737 0.000
Self-assessment of speaking 0.689 0.000
Self-assessment of writing 0.715 0.000
Aggregated assessment of skills 0.795 0.000
Likewise, the correlations between FLSE and the specific skills were positive,
which is shown in Table 3.7.
It is worth noticing that the correlation coefficients remained at a comparable,
high level in both separate and aggregated measurements, the value being slightly
higher in the latter case. The highest correlation appeared between FLSE and
self-assessed speaking skills (Rho = 0.737), it was the second highest for writing
skills, followed by listening and reading. In terms of statistical significance, the
correlation between FLSE and aggregated self-assessment of four macro skills in L2
was found to be positive and significant (p = 0.000, p < 0.05).
Last but not least, proficiency was represented by external assessment, i.e. the
final marks obtained by the whole sample of informants in the previous school/
academic year. The distribution of marks is presented in Table 3.8.
The correlation between FLSE and final grades in the 2nd class/year that the
students reported was positive, (i.e. the correlation coefficient value was 0.548) and
statistically significant (p = 0.000) The image of a high/low FLSE student was
completed by adding the finding that high general achievement in L2 study and
accomplishment in specific language skills, particularly in speaking and writing
corresponded with high FLSE.
Other aspects of the research concerned the issue of selected characteristics of a
learner with high or low level of FLSE. To commence the investigation, the linkage
between learner global self-esteem and FLSE was assessed. The remaining features
in focus can be broadly categorized into demography-related and school-related
ones.
3.3 Results 99
Table 3.8 The final marks Mark Frequency Percent

obtained in the previous class/
year (N = 381) 2 9 2.4
3 102 26.8
4 151 39.6
5 101 26.5
6 18 4.7
Total 381 100.0
Table 3.9 The proportions Gender Frequency Percent

of female and male students in
the whole sample Female 227 59.6
Male 154 40.4
Total 381 100
To address the first aspect of the research question about the correlates of FLSE,
which concerned the possible correlation between global self-esteem and
subject-specific self-esteem, Spearman’s rank correlation was computed on the total
sample. The results clearly confirmed that foreign language self-esteem and global
self-esteem were positively correlated (Rho = 0.218, N = 381). The results of the
exploration into statistical significance of the relationship between foreign language
self-esteem and global self-esteem clearly confirmed that the finding (p = 0.000,
p < 0.05) can be used to make inferences about the population. The correlation
proved to be significant (although its magnitude was not particularly high), hence, a
student who had a sound sense of selfesteem was likely to develop a positive image
of him/herself as a L2 learner.
One of the major demographic factors whose association with FLSE was
investigated is gender. The demographic proportions are presented in Table 3.9.
It was assumed that in accordance with the theoretical claims in 1.5. that girls
have lower foreign language self-esteem than boys (Table 3.10).
The descriptive statistics performed for the entire sample presented identical
medians and very close mean values of FLSE (µ = 29.33; µ = 29.27) for the female
(N = 227) and male groups (N = 154), which implies that the differences between
them were rather negligible. Teenage girls and young women were not outdone by
their male peers in the level of self-regard that they held themselves in as foreign
Table 3.10 Female and male FLSE values in the whole sample
Gender Mean Median Std. deviation Minimum Maximum N
Female 29.33 30.00 5.447 16 40 227
Male 29.27 30.00 5.210 14 39 154
Total 29.31 30.00 5.346 14 40 381
Table 3.11 FLSE and the place of residence in the whole sample
Place of residence Mean Median Std. deviation Minimum Maximum N
A city with a population 31.50 32.00 4.262 21 39 70
over 50,000
A town with a population 29.51 30.00 5.509 16 39 174
between 2,500 and 50,000
A place with a population 27.93 28.00 5.254 14 40 137
up to 2,500
Total 29.31 30.00 5.346 14 40 381
language learners. In other words, gender was not a distinctive feature of a learner
with high or low FLSE. It may need to be remarked, though, that male participants
were underrepresented, because they constituted 40% of the sample, but it may not
seem justifiable to presume that leveling the proportions would account for more
variation. The inferential statistics, i.e. the Mann Whitney U test results, actually
confirmed the descriptive findings. The mean rank for females was 191.67 and for
males 190.01, so the difference was very small, and it can be concluded that FLSE
in the female group was not statistically significantly different from FLSE in the
male group (Z = −0.145, p = 0.885).
Another anticipated characteristic in a profile of a high or low FLSE learner that
the current study examined was the place of residence. It was expected that students
from small towns and villages had lower foreign language self-esteem than students
from large cities. Table 3.11. presents the results of calculations of FLSE for three
groups, depending on the place of residence, that is, a village, a town or a city.
According to descriptive statistics obtained for the whole sample, the partici-
pants living in a city enjoyed the highest level of FLSE (µ = 31.50, Md = 32), and
their results were the least dispersed (SD = 4. 262 < 5.254 < 5.346), outdoing the
inhabitants of towns (µ = 29.51, Md = 30.00) and the inhabitants of small places
with a population of up to 2,500 (µ = 27.93, Md = 28). The graph (Fig. 3.3)
presents the positive correlation between the two variables reported before.
According to the findings, FLSE increased together with the population of the
learner’s place of residence. The significance of the results was checked by means
of Kruskal–Wallis test, whose output in the form of mean ranks (234.86 for city
students and 196.68 for town students and 161.37 for village students) confirmed
the findings. The statistic significance of the differences proved sufficient (df = 2,
p = 0.000, p < 0.05) to reject the claim that they could have been coincidental. The
research hypothesis quoted above was proved to be valid. It was further tested by
comparing paired results, for instance, the FLSE of the participants from large cities
(N = 70) and from towns (N = 174). The city group produced higher median rank
values, (139.14) in comparison with town students (115.81). According to the test
statistics, the difference between the results that the two groups produced is sta-
tistically significant (Z = −2.340, p = 0.019), which made it possible to infer that
students from cities had better self-views as L2 learners than students from small or
average size towns.
3.3 Results 101
Consistently with the previously described results, the participants from towns
(N = 174, mean rank = 168.38) outdid the ones from little places (N = 137) with a
population of up to 2,500 (mean rank = 140.28). The statistic significance of the test
(Z = −2.740, p = 0.006, p < 0.05) provided corroborative evidence for the pro-
posed claim that learners from larger communities were higher in FLSE than those
from villages. Needless to say, a paired comparison between city dwellers (N = 70)
and villagers (N = 137) remained in accordance with the previously described
findings, that is, the former ones demonstrated considerably higher level of FLSE
than the latter (Z = −4.683, p = 0.000). According to the findings a high FLSE
student tended to live in a city, while a low FLSE student resided in a small place.
The next demographic feature under research was connected with family
background of a language learner. In order to verify whether, students whose
closest relatives know English, have significantly different foreign language
self-esteem than those whose family do not know any foreign language foreign
language self-esteem levels were compared. The entire sample having been con-
sidered, the mean of the FLSE of those whose relatives did not know any foreign
language (N = 186) was 28.47 (SD = 5.262), and it was lower than that of the
students whose relatives were reported to know a foreign language (µ = 30.11,
SD = 5.315, N = 195). The dispersion of the results conveyed by the value of
standard deviation was quite similar in both groups. The descriptive statistics are
displayed in Table 3.9.
As laid out in Fig. 3.4, the difference appeared to be quite substantial
(Table 3.12).
Fig. 3.4 FLSE means and ranges in relation to the place of residence
Table 3.12 FLSE and English-speaking relatives in the whole sample

Close relatives Mean Median Std. deviation Minimum Maximum N
speak English
No 28.47 29.00 5.262 14 39 186
Yes 30.11 31.00 5.315 16 40 195
Total 29.31 30.00 5.346 14 40 381
Table 3.13 The proportions of students who liked and disliked their FL teachers in the whole
sample
Likes the teacher of English Frequency Percent
No 71 18.6
Yes 310 81.4
Total 381 100.0
The statistic significance of the postulated relevance of having a close relative

who spoke English was measured with the Mann Whitney U test, that was run to
compare the means obtained by those who declared or declined having them. The
computations confirmed the first glance observations, i.e. the group with
English-speaking next of kin outdid the other. The test indicated that the students
who had close relatives that spoke English, with the mean rank value of 208.26,
enjoyed higher FLSE than students who had no relatives with such knowledge, with
the mean rank value of 186 (Z = −3.137, p = 0.002, p < 0.05). The above con-
siderations result in adding another element to the description of a high or low L2
self-esteem learner, i.e., the former one more often than not has a close relative who
speaks L2, unlike the latter one who does not admit having any speaker of L2 at
home.
The next feature of a high/low FLSE profile under research was the attitude
towards the L2 teacher. The demographic proportions between the groups of stu-
dents who liked their teacher had higher foreign language self-esteem than those
who were negatively minded are presented in Table 3.13.
According to descriptive statistics, shown in Table 3.14, the mean value of
FLSE of students who liked their teacher of English was higher (µ = 29.69) than
Table 3.14 Means, medians and standard deviations of FLSE in groups liking or disliking their
teacher in the whole sample
Likes the teacher Mean Median Std. deviation Minimum Maximum N
of English
No 27.66 27.00 5.372 14 38 71
Yes 29.69 30.50 5.276 16 40 310
Total 29.31 30.00 5.346 14 40 381
3.3 Results 103
Fig. 3.5 FLSE means and

ranges in relation to the
knowledge of English by
close relatives
Fig. 3.6 FLSE levels of

participants who disliked (1),
N = 71/liked (2), N = 310 the
teacher
that of those who denied liking for their teachers (µ = 27.66). By looking at the
extreme values of FLSE one may notice that the range was relatively wide, but
similar in both groups, which was confirmed by standard deviation measures
(SD = 5.372, SD = 5.276 respectively). The proportions of positive and negative
attitude holders were not even, i.e. the former outnumbered the latter by more than
four times.
The graph (Fig. 3.5) illustrates the difference between the results obtained by the
two groups (Fig. 3.6)
The difference proved to be statistically significant (p = 0.005), which invited a
conclusion that a learner who was positively minded towards their instructor had a
higher level of FLSE than one who held a negative attitude.
Another question addressed by the research concerned the relation between
FLSE and participation in extra-curricular activities in English. In order to learn
Table 3.15 FLSE of students who have/do not have extracurricular FL activities in the whole
sample
Extracurricular Mean Median Std. deviation Minimum Maximum N
activities
No 28.55 29.00 5.359 14 40 239
Yes 30.58 31.00 5.092 18 39 142
Total 29.31 30.00 5.346 14 40 381
whether there was any difference between students who participated in extracur-
ricular activities and those who denied it, the mean values for the “yes” and “no”
groups were computed. The results are summarized in Table 3.15.
The mean and median values of the students who declared participation in extra
FL activities exceeded those of their counterparts. The results of the former ones
were less dispersed (SD = 5.092 < SD = 5.359). The graph below lays out the gap
between them and those who did not participate in extra classes (Fig. 3.7).
Another statistic measure, which was Mann Whitney U test, showed that the
group who reported participation was significantly different in this respect from that
who declined it. The mean rank for those with extracurricular activities was 218.33,
while for those who denied the participation it was 174.76. The statistic calculations
(p = 0.000, p < 0.05) allowed for an observation that students who attended
extracurricular FL activities were higher in FLSE. The results made another con-
tribution towards understanding what made a learner whose level of FLSE was
high/low, encouraging one to consider participation in extra activities as a dis-
tinctive feature of the high FLSE one.
Another question addressed by the research concerned a cluster of selected
correlates of FLSE from the personal domain. The summary of the measures of
descriptive statistics can be found in Table 3.16.
Fig. 3.7 FLSE of students

with and without
extracurricular FL activities
3.3 Results 105
Table 3.16 The descriptive statistics of the L2-related personal factors (N = 381)
Mean Median Mode Std. deviation Minimum Maximum
FLSE 29.31 30.00 31 5.346 14 40
Global self-esteem 28.88 29.00 29 4.904 10 40
Ideal L2-self 22.73 23.00 30 5.265 5 30
L2 learning beliefs 36.73 37.00 40 6.408 19 55
Language anxiety 57.52 59.00 54 16.491 17 85
Learning strategies 47.25 48.00 46 6.983 18 64
Table 3.17 The summary of correlations between FLSE and selected L2 learning-related
variables in the whole sample
Aspects of L2 learning Correlation p
Ideal L2-self 0.710 0.000
Language anxiety 0.717 0.000
Learning strategies 0.377 0.000
Learning beliefs 0.463 0.000
Each of the variables manifested a positive, albeit varied correlation with the
focal construct, which can be seen in Table 3.17.
The first of the hypothesized correlates was the Ideal L2-Self. The descriptive
statistics results that were assessed indicated the Ideal L2-Self at the mean level of
22.73 (max = 30; SD = 5.625). The Spearman correlation coefficient
(Rho = 0.710) had a positive value, and it was quite high, so the students with high
levels of Ideal L2-Self were inclined to manifest significantly higher levels of
FLSE. In terms of statistic significance of the finding, the calculations showed that
the p-value was 0.000 (see Table 3.17). The linear regression calculated for the
predictor variable (Ideal L2-Self) and the response variable (FLSE) revealed that an
increase in Ideal L2-Self caused an increase in FLSE by 0.7 of a point
(FLSE = 13.42 + 0.7x). The predictor value of the Ideal L2-Self was 47.3. The
findings validated the supposition that the more positive vision of the ideal future
attributes the learner held, the higher foreign language self-esteem they were likely
to represent.
Another relation between FLSE and FL learning-related factors explored in the
study was between the key construct and public communication anxiety. The mean
value of the communication anxiety (µ) was 57.52 (max = 85), the standard
deviation (SD) 16,491. The statistic calculations towards the correlation revealed its
relatively high value, i.e. Rho = 0.717, p = 0.000. There was a positive relationship
between FLSE and L2 communication anxiety, which may require an explanation.
As a matter of fact, the scale had reversed-value statements, which had to be taken
into account at the interpretation stage. Consequently, the informants with higher
FLSE tended to feel less anxious while communicating in English. The results
remained in an approximately linear arrangement, which indicates that along with

the improvement in foreign language-related self views, L2 communication anxiety
changed proportionately. The output of inferential statistics evinced that the vari-
ables correlated in a statistically significant way (p = 0.000). The linear regression
established that communication anxiety and foreign language self-esteem were
interrelated, and one of the factors accounted for 51.13 of the variability in the
other. The regression equation was: FLSE = 15.96 + 0.23x (L2 communication
anxiety). The conjecture about the relation between the variables was ultimately
confirmed.
Another important correlate of FLSE put forward in accordance with the theo-
retical models presented in the preceding chapters was the use of foreign language
learning strategies. It was presumed that high FLSE learners used different learning
strategies than low FLSE learners. In order to verify the claim, the correlations were
computed and the output confirmed its validity. The correlation was found to be
positive (Rho = 0.377), which was the acknowledgement of the presupposed claim.
The statistic computations revealed that there was a certain proportion of outliers
which decreased the magnitude of the correlation and that removing them resulted
in a notable increase in the output. At any rate, the correlation was found to be
statistically significant (p = 0.000, p < 0.05). The linear regression coefficient made
it possible to predict that FLSE increased by 17.04 of a mark for every point more
scored on learning strategies (x). The R squared (0.115) together with the signifi-
cance value (p = 0.000) indicated that changes in the use of L2 learning strategies
(which were predictor values), were associated with changes in FLSE—the
response values.
The next purpose of the current study was exploring the relationship between
FLSE and L2 learning beliefs. The analyses of the association are reported in
Table 3.14. The calculation of Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient revealed that
FLSE correlated positively with beliefs about language learning (Rho = 0.463).
According to the inferential statistics, the finding possessed statistical significance.
Besides, the results of the regression analysis showed that beliefs about language
learning were associated with foreign language self-esteem in the following way: an
increase in L2 learning beliefs caused an increase in FLSE by 14.42 of a point, and
the predictor variable (L2 beliefs) had a significant explanatory power of 23.6%.
The summary of findings of the inferential statistics is contained in Table 3.18.
All of the factors under consideration proved to be markedly related to learner
FLSE. Besides, all of them were its potent predictors. The selection of learning
strategies appeared to have the highest explanatory power, whilst the remaining
Table 3.18 FLSE and Personal factors Regression p-value

L2-related variables
Ideal L2-self 59.6 0.000
Language anxiety 40.4 0.000
Learning strategies 100 0.000
Learning beliefs 46.3 0.000
3.3 Results 107
correlates can be ranked as follows according to the magnitude of the linear

regression: the Ideal L2-Self had the second strongest FLSE prediction power,
followed by Learning beliefs and Language anxiety.
3.3.2 Qualitative Findings
The portrayal of a high/low self-esteem learner was completed via the qualitative
part of the research, which took a form of interviews with the participants who
obtained the maximum and minimum results in the foreign language self-esteem
measurement. Five students with the highest and five with the lowest FLSE results
were identified following a respective calculation and invited for individual inter-
view sessions. Within the maximum FLSE batch, there were students from upper
secondary schools and colleges, while the minimum comprised representatives of
all the educational levels. The issues that were probed into during the interviews in
expectation of some insightful complementation of the learner profile were L1
acquisition and early L2 learning experience. Besides, there were questions about
selected personality traits, such as outspokenness or shyness. Additionally, mastery
experiences and the role of significant people were investigated. The further section
was about extra language practice that learners chose to perform on their own. The
final questions were about academic achievement operationalized as GPA and
comparisons to classmates.
One of the focal points of the interviews were early L1 and L2 learning expe-
rience. As for L1 acquisition experience, three of the informants declared that they
had learnt to speak relatively early, the remaining two said they were like other
children their age. None had any impediments or had to visit a speech therapist.
One boasted of learning to write remarkably early—I did not wait long with starting
to write, maybe because I had an older sister, whose mental development seemingly
stimulated mine (Z pisaniem też długo nie czekałem, może ze względu na starszą
siostrę, również dość intelektualnie rozwiniętą, która stymulowała moje postępy)
(Kuba). They had pleasant memories of early L2 learning experience—they
enjoyed singing songs, playing games, acting out scenes, etc. Kuba mentioned that
he had been taught English by his parent, which he remembers as pleasurable
experience. The motivating role of the teacher was considered as important, for
example Kinga said, … I’ve been always lucky to have good teachers. I’ve been
fond of school and the teachers. And so it is now. (…ja zawsze miałam szczęście do
nauki i nauczycielek. Lubiłam naukę i te wszystkie panie. Teraz też jest ok.). All
claimed they liked the English language.
When questioned about selected personality characteristics, all of the intervie-
wees stated they felt popular and they had no major problems with communication
in a group; four of them admitted they found it easier to speak out in a circle of
friends, rather than in a large ensemble, two described themselves as rather quiet.
Interestingly, one of the two (Kuba) confessed that he became more open and
talkative in English than in Polish. Kinga said that she was often made a
spokesperson for the class on the grounds of being outspoken. She found com-
municating in English quite natural and easy, and she made a recollection of a visit
to England with her class, when she used to be sent errands as a person who had no
inhibitions in speaking the foreign language. I haven’t got any problem [with
speaking English]. When we were in London, it was me that was sent to find out or
arrange different things, like when somebody found that the hand towel was missing
in the bathroom or something of the kind. They would say, Kinga, can you go and
fix it?. I am not scared, I say ‘ok’ and go and that’s it. (… nie mam oporów. Jak
byliśmy w Londynie ze szkoły, to wszędzie MNIE wysyłali, żeby się o coś
dowiedzieć, albo coś załatwić. Ktoś nie miał ręcznika w łazience, czy coś to …
‘Kinga, Kinga, idź załatw’. Ja się nie boję, idę już). They all reflected that there was
not much difference between their willingness to communicate in L1 and L2.
Another section of the interviews targeted at building the profile was the role of
mastery experiences. All of the interviewees mentioned trips abroad, which gave
them opportunities to use English for practical purposes and emphasized the feeling
of satisfaction triggered by the experience. One person remembered helping for-
eigners communicate in a hostel in Poland as very important to his self-confidence.
A college student was flattered by being complimented by a native speaker on her
fluency. Four students mentioned that they found teachers’ praise very important,
one mentioned receiving a high grade for an important test as a source of satis-
faction (together with the positive feedback from the teacher). When asked about
memories of some unpleasant experience in learning the English language, they
failed to remember anything important. Natalia, a university student, found it rather
displeasing when somebody asked her about an English equivalent of a Polish word
and she could not provide it. She commented on the event in the following way, I
find situations of the kind awkward because I realize, that as a student of the
English language I should know the answer (Uważam takie sytuacje za niezręczne,
ponieważ wiem, że jako studentka anglistyki powinnam wiedzieć takie rzeczy).
The next topic focused on significant people whose command of English
impressed the interviewees and acted as a motivating power. Four informants talked
about native speakers of English as their role models. Native-like fluency and
pronunciation were mentioned as ultimate goals that they pursued. For one female
college student, her lower secondary teacher of English was the inspiring and
motivating force. Other than that, nobody quoted any specific people whose
luminous example they would like to follow.
They were also inquired about beyond-school opportunities to practise English,
and they all had something to talk about. One of the most popular activities is
chatting to foreigners online or reading websites in English. Kinga, the upper
secondary student reported that she looked for every opportunity to practice spoken
communication while she was abroad. When we were in London, which I have
mentioned before, I deliberately tried to engage shop assistants in a conversation
about different things in the shop, I asked them about some toys, as far as I can
remember. They knew I did it for sheer practice and they just joined in. (Jak byliśmy
wtedy w Londynie, co już wcześniej mówiłam, to ja się specjalnie w sklepach
dopytywałam o rożne rzeczy, pamiętam nawet o jakieś zabawki. Żeby mówić.
3.3 Results 109
Te panie w sklepie wiedziały, że ja tak specjalnie, ale były miłe i dawały się
zagadywać). Someone else mentioned talking to his sister in English at home. What
proved to be likeable was trying to translate song lyrics or watching undubbed films
and series in English. One student could not think of any self-selected extra L2
practice, although she conceded that she might try if opportunities emerged.
One of the last issues explored via the interviews was general academic
achievement and the comparison between attainment in English and other subjects.
The GPA fell between 4.0 and 5.0 in all the cases, four of which were between 4.5
and 5.0 so the respondents were high-achieving students. They unanimously
indicated English (or Practical English in the case of university students) as the
subject in which they performed better than in any other.
The other aim of the qualitative study was investigating the characteristics of low
FLSE learners according to the same sequence of questions as above. As for their
early L1 development, two interviewees denied any knowledge about it, one started
to walk before he stated to talk, one said that he started to speak rather late, and one
had to visit a speech therapist in order to eradicate problems with pronouncing the
sound ‘r’. Their first years of L2 learning were not recalled as pleasant experience.
The adjectives which they used to describe it were such as boring (Dawid) or hard
(Nikola). Karol said, po prostu nie lubiłem tego (I just didn’t like it). There were
complaints that the teachers did not try to make the lessons interesting or that they
made the young learners write a lot in their notebooks. One of the students com-
plained he had bad memories of tests because he would always get a low grade.
In terms of personality traits, the interviewees declared they preferred smaller
groups of friends, not exceeding four people. One stated openly that he was popular
with his classmates, whereas one said bluntly she was just the opposite. Someone
concluded he felt most confident at home. The willingness to communicate was
considerably lower in L2. All the interviewees admitted they felt intimidated when
they had to say something in English in class. They were anxious they would make
mistakes in front of their classmates. The fear of making mistakes seemed to be a
really important hindrance to every person—one of them quoted a couple of
examples of mistakes he had made while speaking in class, and he remarked that
the other students laughed at him. At least, as he assured the interviewer, he did not
give up his attempts to speak, though he was deeply aware of inaccuracies in his
performance. The remaining respondents were more likely to abandon the attempts
at saying something, especially when they were under time pressure. Dawid
admitted that it was not infrequent that he was outdone by his classmates in the
immediacy of response, Even if I know what to say in class, I will not manage to
articulate it before others who are quicker (Tylko, że nawet jak wiem, to czasem nie
zdążę, bo ktoś inny już to powie.).
The role of mastery experiences in the case of the low FLSE learners was not
particularly significant. Two of them were not able to recall a situation in which
they would feel proud or satisfied with their performance in English. Two male
informants (Dawid and Wiktor) remembered single situations in which they com-
municated in English while abroad (in a camp in Croatia and with a host family in
France). They realized in the circumstances that English was a practical instrument
rather than only a subject to study. Other events that were reported as important and
motivating was getting a good mark in a class test or winning the third place in a
class competition. Nobody was willing to describe any unpleasant situation con-
nected with learning English. Unanimously, the students enjoyed being praised by
their teachers in class, although one of them had hardly experienced it.
As for the people whom the interviewees admired for their competence in
English, one of them indicated journalists who were able to switch between Polish
and English spontaneously while on air. It was relevant as he was thinking of
becoming a journalist in the future. Others mentioned some distant family members
or neighbours who were able to help them in homework. One student (Kornelia)
gave an example of a Dutch middle-aged woman, whom she met on a trip to
Holland, and she expressed surprise at the fact that someone belonging to the
generation of her parents spoke a foreign language.
The extracurricular language practice that the informants reported was rather
scarce. The lower secondary school student occasionally communicated with for-
eigners while playing computer games. Another person used to try to understand
songs in English but she abandoned it. The other people had nothing to say in this
respect, they seemed not to feel any need to expand what they did at school.
Their achievement in English was mainly reported as comparable with (two
interviewees) or lower than (two interviewees) in other subjects. Wiktor admitted
that he could see that his classmates do better and he would like to keep up with
them but it is impossible. (Widzę jak innym idzie w klasie lepiej i ja też bym chciał
tak jak oni, ale to się chyba nie da.) Dawid hesitantly replied that he did better in
English than in other subjects. The general academic achievement was quite dis-
persed in the group. As far as the GPA is concerned, one person fell between 4.0
and 5.0; two interviewees between 3.0 and 4.0; and the two remaining ones
between 2,0 and 3,0.
The data gathered during the interviews added to contextualizing FLSE and can
be briefly summarized. To begin with, it can be noticed that high FLSE students had
no history of delayed speech development or any impediments; they were either
like other children in the rate of L1 acquisition or faster. The low FLSE intervie-
wees reported speech delay, visiting a speech therapist, or maintaining the average
rate of speech development at the best. When it comes to early L2 learning. The
high FLSE students had definitely pleasant memories of the process, and they
remembered it as fun and play experience. Their counterparts had either no
memories or rather unpleasant ones, i.e. their early English recollections were
reduced to writing tests or having to write a lot in their notebooks. The personality
related issues also let one draw a distinction between the two cohorts. The higher
FLSE was accompanied with more outspokenness and popularity. Only one low
FLSE interviewee claimed to have satisfying relationships with a larger peer
group. The willingness to communicate in L2 was also affected by the distinction,
namely, the low FLSE batch were too intimidated to speak, while their high
counterparts admitted that they sought opportunities to practise speaking. The
episodes of successful communication in English were the source of pride to them.
Both parties declared they enjoyed teacher’s praise, but only the top FLSE people
3.3 Results 111
said openly that they liked their teachers of English. The people whose English
those students would admire were simply native speakers of the language. The
“low-end” informants quoted examples of people who were able to communicate
successfully, but they were not oriented towards native-like competence. They did
not try to practice English in beyond-school life, unlike the other batch who
mentioned watching films, translating lyrics, communicating on the Internet, etc. In
general, high FLSE went with higher academic achievement, and, higher attainment
in L2.
3.4 Limitations of the Study
The present study has been undertaken with a purpose to make a sizable contri-
bution to the understanding of learner foreign language self-esteem, its dynamics
and interaction with important aspects of SLA. At the same time, however, it only
fair to point out to some limitations that should be referred to before any broad
generalizations can be made. They are related to the design and participants.
Given the dynamic changes in FLSE over adolescence and the onset of adult-
hood, the research might have produced slightly different results if it had a longi-
tudinal design. Observing the directions of change in FLSE in the same participants
over the period of six years of their educational transitions higher could have
provided more control over the developmental changes, which would have possibly
accounted for higher validity and reliability of the results. On the other hand,
following the course of study of the same cohorts would be challenging in practical
terms, as students change schools and classes get dispersed after they complete each
stage of education. A practical measure taken in order to optimize the reliability of
the study and make the generalizations of its findings more legitimate was ensuring
a relatively large number of participants.
The next limitation pertains to the choice of the research method, which was
correlational and differential, and as such did not allow for exploring causal rela-
tionships between FLSE and its correlates. By way of explanation it should be put
forward that the main issue under research, i.e. observing the dynamics of FLSE
across three educational stages called for the design mentioned. Drawing causal
inferences about the predictors of FLSE would be possible if experimental research
methods had been selected (Graziano & Raulin, 2012). The attempt at compen-
sating for the setback was the application of linear regression, which enabled the
researcher to make inferences about causality in the case of several correlates of
FLSE.
The study also suffered a limitation concerning the method of data collection.
Originally, it was assumed that the disambiguation of data on student achievement
would be achieved via cross-validating students self-assessment and objective
assessment obtained from the school records (class register books), however it
proved impossible to gain access to the documents. One of the Heads of the schools
refused to disclose them on the grounds of personal data protection law. For this
reason the researcher was forced to rely on students’ reports on their end-of
school-year marks in English.
Another limitation worth considering concerns the sampling of participants. The
upper secondary, extended-English wave may be perceived as more heterogeneous
than recommended for the purposes of the study. Approximately a half of the cohort
comprised students who followed an intensive course of English in a class that
specialized in humanities and languages. It might be an implication that they took a
special liking to L2, and might possibly be considering as a subject of more
intensive study at the tertiary level. The other half came from a class specializing in
Sciences, and in most cases the students did not consider English as the subject of
special interest. Such an apparently excessive heterogeneity could have affected the
participants’ attitudes to English, and become an extraneous variable. The pre-
caution taken towards minimizing its distorting effects was unifying the intensity
and the level of the L2 instruction. Thus, all the participants had five lessons of
English per week at B2+ level.
As for the participants, the research comprised secondary and tertiary students,
whilst it did not make any allowances for primary learners. Partly, the limitation
resulted from the theoretical models that underlay the empirical part. In accordance
with the theoretical claims, pubertal and post-pubertal years are the most dynamic
period in the whole life span as far as the level of self-esteem is concerned. In mid
and late teens the sense of self-worthiness is most vulnerable to change (Crozier,
1997). Besides, middle school students were believed to have more capability for
self-reflection, not to mention sheer length of learning experience. It seems
doubtless, that younger learners would need to be probed with a different measure
instrument, that would contain more straightforward questions, or, possibly, by
means of a completely different data collection method.
Finally, what may be seen as a technical limitation is a certain degree of tech-
nical inconsistency in measurement. Due to the limited access to computer labo-
ratories, one cohort (English Philology students) had to complete paper and pen
questionnaires, while all the remaining ones performed them online. Both versions
were identical in terms of content, but altogether it seems that the online survey
took less time. The most serious setback of the paper questionnaires, though, was
the necessity to digitalize the data, which was not the most time efficient solution.
Besides, the informants seemed to be slightly more willing to participate in the
online task, however, it is a subjective impression of the researcher, most probably
irrelevant to the ultimate results of the study.
The aim of this chapter was to present and explain how the research was pre-
pared and conducted, as well as what results it produced. It started with the resume
of the aims of the study and explication of the general research questions, which
were grounded in and induced by the theoretical models of foreign language
self-esteem and its antecedents and consequences laid out in the preceding chapters.
The questions were particularized by research claims, which were meant to explore
the research questions further. In the next part the research method was discussed,
with a special emphasis on the characteristics of participants, who were in three
3.4 Limitations of the Study 113
cohorts representing three consecutive educational levels lower and upper sec-
ondary schools from Krosno and higher education institutions from Krosno and
Cracow. There was also a detailed description of the instruments which were used
to collect quantitative and qualitative data. It was followed by the summary of the
procedures of data collection. Subsequently, there was an inventory of statistical
analyses that were applied in order to answer the research questions and test the
research hypotheses. The largest part of the chapter was taken by the presentation of
the results, followed by an account of the limitations of the study.
Taking into consideration the findings of the quantitative and the qualitative
parts of the research, they can be summarized in the following way:
1. As learner’s level of proficiency in English grows, their FLSE increases, which
is supported by:
• the length of FL learning experience
• more intensive exposure to L2
• higher achievement rendered by global and specific self-assessment of the
four macro skills are higher in FLSE (the strongest interplay occurs between
FLSE and self-assessed speaking and writing)
• higher grades
2. Students who have a high level of global self-esteem have a high FLSE level.
3. Demographic factors have varied relationship with students’ FLSE:
• Females and males do not differ in their FLSE levels.
• FLSE is related to the place of residence—rural students report lower FLSE
than urban students.
• Learners whose closest relatives speak English boast higher FLSE than those
whose family do not know the language.
4. Selected factors from the educational domain are positively correlated with
students’ FLSE
• students who like their teacher reveal higher FLSE than those who have a
negative attitude to her/him.
• students who participate in extracurricular activities are higher in FLSE than
those who deny the participation.
5. Learners with a high level of FLSE have a strong sense of the Ideal L2-Self. The
more positive vision of the ideal future attributes the learner holds, the higher
foreign language self-esteem they are likely to develop.
6. Students with low FLSE are more anxious to communicate in L2 than those with
high FLSE.
7. Students with high FLSE use different learning strategies than students with low
FLSE.
8. Students with more positive L2 learning beliefs are higher in FLSE in com-
parison to those with less positive beliefs.
9. Learners with high FLSE are less likely to experience disturbed speech devel-
opment in L1 or inhibitions in speaking L2. They have positive memories of
early English learning and successful experience in using the language for
practical purposes. They have found ways of improving English beyond school.
They are likeable friends and high-achieving students.
In the next chapter (Chap. 4) the findings of the qualitative and quantitative
research are discussed.
Chapter 4
Discussion
The aim of the chapter is to discuss the results of the quantitative and qualitative
studies presented in the preceding part. It starts with the interpretation of the
findings connected with fluctuations of foreign language self-esteem seen from the
perspective of the theoretical considerations (De Fraine, Van Damme, & Onghena,
2007; Liu, 2008; Orth, Trzesniewski, & Robins, 2010). In the next section, the most
influential correlates of L2 self-esteem are discussed, followed by an attempt to
propose a profile of a learner with high and low level of the construct, likewise on
the basis quantitative and qualitative findings.
4.1 Foreign Language Self-esteem

and the Level of Proficiency
The literature of the subject and relevant research reveal that hardly any other area
of study presents as much threat to self-views as foreign language learning.
Language learning is far more “ego-involving” than other areas of study (Arnold,
2007; Mercer, 2011). Since language learning process is social by nature (Mills,
2014), a very common problem that language learners experience is that they feel
they cannot express their ideas properly in L2, and, as a result they are prone to
think that they appear foolish (Arnold, 2007; Piechurska-Kuciel, 2008). Using a
language which the individual does not have sufficient command of, makes the self
especially vulnerable. According to existing research, self-esteem influences
behaviour, therefore, the way students feel about themselves is likely to determine
the way they tackle the challenges of the learning experience as well as their
relationship with others. Helping students to build their self-esteem should be one
of the crucial aims of foreign language instructors. Hence, the better understanding
of the construct, the higher the probability of having successful foreign language
teaching/learning.

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-75283-9_4
116 4 Discussion
The first research question concerned the changes that foreign language
self-esteem undergoes over time and with growing proficiency and it was worded as
follows: What is the dynamics of learner foreign language self-esteem in secondary
and tertiary education?
The concept of proficiency was operationalized in a manifold manner, namely as
the length and intensity of exposure to English, as well as achievement represented
by self-assessment and external assessment of First, it was given the dimension of
the length of exposure to L2. The current study findings revealed a statistically
significant, positive correlation between FLSE and the length of exposure to L2 for
the whole sample, which corroborates with this aspect of the research question. The
mean value of FLSE for the whole sample was comparatively high, which places
Polish teenage and young adult students in the upper half of the range. It can be
acknowledged on the basis of the findings that, as the length of learning exposure
grows, the learners may, with a certain degree of likelihood develop higher
self-confidence in L2 learning. It is worth mentioning that learning experience
should not be perceived as proportionate to age, as the sample contained mature
students who started learning English one or two years before the study.
In order to validate the results, the relevant theoretical considerations need to be
reminded. To begin with, on the basis of the theoretical models presented in
Chap. 1, the construct of foreign language self-esteem was defined as the value
people place on themselves, stemming from their past achievement and feedback
from significant others, and the sense of competence that they feel when they learn
the language. Learners who have “healthy” self-esteem (neither too high, nor too
low) are focused on growth, well-motivated and goal-oriented; they believe in
themselves and are not easily discouraged by temporary lack of success. Moreover,
what is particularly meaningful in the context of SLA, they have good communi-
cation skills and happy relationships. Conversely, holders of low self-esteem tend to
be poorly motivated underachievers, avoiding risk, troubled by failure more than
needed, and generally negative in outlook. Additionally, they may be anxious and
withdrawn and, in consequence, have impaired communication skills (Branden,
1995; Vonk & Smit, 2011). Individuals operating with such characteristics will be
unable to exploit their full potential and manage their learning efficiently.
A broader interpretation of the results would not be complete without references
to antecedents of specific self-esteem. They are of intrapersonal and interpersonal
nature (Marsh in Mercer, 2011). Intrapersonal sources of self-esteem are related to
comparisons within the self of previous performances in L2 or other domains.
A high-achieving learner tends to have a history of successful and ego-enhancing
learning experiences, also referred to by Skaalvik and Skaalvik (2002) as mastery
experiences. Their repertoire keeps building up with time, so the longer the
exposure, the richer the records of positive events. Likewise, a high-achieving L2
learner’s comparisons with other domains give raise to feelings of satisfaction with
attainment in L2, and, as the length of exposure grows, the store of FLSE-boosting
reflections is likely to grow. A low FLSE learner will have gathered quite opposite
experiences—dissatisfaction, a sense of low competence, poor performance, etc.
Essential as it is, academic achievement will not have a full impact on L2
4.1 Foreign Language Self-esteem and the Level of Proficiency 117
self-esteem without what Skaalvik and Skaalvik (2002) called psychological cen-
trality. Self-assessments of attributes and competences that are important (psy-
chologically central) to a learner are far more potent in specific self-esteem
formation than those perceived as peripheral.
As for interpersonal sources of FLSE, the role of significant others is worth
mentioning in this place. Firstly, teachers are the prominent individuals whose
opinions affect L2 self-esteem. This is not to say that opinions of all teachers affect
it in the same way. Learners are more likely to be influenced by those whom they
respect. So, throughout their 9–15-year-long school experience the respondents will
have encountered different instructors, whose appraisals they were affected by at
varying degrees. It may be assumed that those who developed sound FLSE enjoyed
constructive, motivating supervision for most of their time of exposure to English.
Again, the longer the learners receive positive feedback, the more solid their
self-liking grows, or, conversely, the longer-lasting the negative feedback is, the
less self-liking remains. Other significant individuals who may have a formative
influence on L2 self-esteem may be family members (whose role will be discussed
in the further section), girlfriends, boyfriends, pen friends, etc.
As far as the length of exposure to L2 is concerned, it has been empirically
proved that gathering experience in learning and accumulating knowledge leads to
boosting self-confidence of the language learner. Meanwhile, as it was propounded
in the theoretical chapters (Liu et al., 2009; Marsh, 1989), the length of exposure
may be outdone in the magnitude of effect on FLSE by other factors, such as age.
The onset of puberty is accompanied by some decline in self-views, reaching its
culmination in mid to late adolescence, which may be accounted for by physio-
logical changes, choosing new schools and changing school environments.
Additionally, some individuals may experience disturbances in relations with par-
ents, peers or the opposite sex. As described above, there is a positive correlation
between the focal construct and length of exposure for the whole sample. However,
having taken a closer look at the calculations, one will notice that the increase in
FLSE was not steady. As a matter of fact, its mean values were very slightly lower
in the upper secondary students than in the lower secondary ones. The decline was
observed respectively in the extended and non-extended “streams”, and could be
explained by the effect of age on self-liking indicated by the previous researches.
Another notable observation was that the increase in FLSE between the upper
secondary and tertiary level should not be interpreted without assuming a twofold
perspective, i.e. taking a separate look at learners following extended and
non-extended courses, as their results are markedly discrepant.
Another dimension that the construct of proficiency acquired was the intensity of
exposure to English. It may be worth reminding that the relevant hypothesis stated
that FLSE is related to the level of proficiency. The research findings supported the
claim—the correlation between the variables was found to be positive. In other
words, the more intensive the instruction is and, consequently, the more advanced
the learner is, the higher their L2 self-perceptions are. The finding is in consonance
with the claims made in the theoretical chapters (Liu, 2009), according to which
higher level students report higher L2 self-esteem. This finding can be attributed to
118 4 Discussion
the sense of personal growth that s/he develops, i.e. observing that the receptive and
productive skills improve, the spoken and written competences develop, and, in the
most literal sense, the markings of levels on the learning materials change from A1
through C2 every year. Moreover, the very awareness of attending an extended
course of foreign language in contrast to non-extended peer groups (in other classes
or schools) is likely to give rise to a heightened self-image. Following this line of
reasoning, studying the language towards an extended version of school-leaving
exams in the case of secondary students may also contribute to high FLSE.
There is also some empirical evidence, though, that the growth of FLSE does not
occur proportionately to a learner’s proficiency. As revealed by other researches,
the FLSE of lower level students showed more dynamics over time by growing
more robustly than that of higher-level learners (Liu, 2009). Arnaiz (2012) went a
step further and proved in her study that students at a higher level had lower
academic self-esteem. In the light of the current research results, it needs to be
admitted that the way learners feel about themselves may vary across the different
stages of the language learning process. As stated before, although for the whole
sample the correlation between FLSE and proficiency was positive and statistically
significant, the relationship was not equally potent in all age cohorts. The lower
secondary groups revealed a remarkable gap between the FLSE values in the groups
following an extended or non-extended course of English. Conversely, the upper
secondary groups were not distinct enough for the difference to be qualified as
statistically significant. What is more, both in the extended and the non-extended
strand, the mean values of FLSE were lower than in the corresponding lower
secondary groups. In the tertiary education groups, like in the lower secondary
ones, the FLSE of the extended students was again significantly higher than that of
the non-extended ones. There may be several interpretations of the findings. One of
them is that the pubescent decline in self-esteem mentioned before accounted for
the fact that 18-year-olds were still affected, and the whole cohort decreased in their
self-beliefs. The more proficient group failed to develop sufficient L2 self-esteem to
outdo their less proficient peers.
Another possible factor that might have affected the results is of demographic
nature. Approximately a half of the upper secondary, intensive (extended) batch
came from a class specializing in Humanities, with an extended syllabus in the
Polish language and a course of L3. Therefore, it may be assumed that the students
were genuinely interested in language learning, possibly planning to major in
languages at colleges and universities, and more often than not solidly motivated.
The other half of the upper secondary extended respondents recruited from a class
specializing in Sciences. Even though the number of hours of English per week was
identical for the whole cohort, the attitudes toward foreign languages might have
been different. It might well have been the case that the students majoring in
Sciences treated English as a mere subject to study at school, or, at the best as a
practical tool for communication in their future jobs, unrelated to any extensive
work in the field of language. The domain of the foreign language did not meet the
criterion of centrality in order to become a significant source of self-esteem. Yet
another explanation for the comparatively low average values of FLSE that the
4.1 Foreign Language Self-esteem and the Level of Proficiency 119
upper secondary, extended classes obtained is that the class majoring in Sciences
was from a school that has a reputation for having a rather authoritarian or
patronizing attitude to students, which may be detrimental to their sense of
self-worthiness. The observation is not supported by any research, so it presents a
low academic value, but in a rather small community of the town such social
perceptions are sometimes weighty. In conclusion, an interesting result of the study
is that proficiency viewed as the intensity of instruction is a more reliable correlate
of FLSE than the length of exposure as groups following extended courses were
higher in FLSE than their non-extended older counter-parts. It is apparent that as the
proficiency level increases, the learner becomes more confident in using L2.
In order to investigate the interplay between learner FLSE and his/her level of
proficiency in the language as extensively as possible, another aspect of proficiency
was specified, i.e. learner achievement. FL achievement regarded as pertinent to
specific self-esteem (Chen, Yeh, Hwang, & Lin, 2013; Sanchez & Roda, 2003) was
operationalised for the purposes of the research by self-assessment of four linguistic
skills—listening, speaking, reading and writing (in global and specific perspective)
and by final marks obtained in the previous year of study, reported by the partic-
ipants. The prediction about the relationship was formulated as follows: students
with higher proficiency viewed as achievement in FL have higher foreign language
self-esteem in comparison to those with lower achievement. The correlation
between FLSE and achievement in both its aspects was found to be positive.
Considering the former aspect mentioned above, the correlation between FLSE
and self-assessed achievement in language skills is high. It remains positive and
high both for aggregated self-assessment of four macro skills, and for each skill
separately, which is the assertion of the claim that the higher a learner is in FLSE,
the higher their self-assessed proficiency in L2 is. The highest correlation appears
between FLSE and self-assessed speaking skills, it is the second highest for writing
skills, followed by listening and reading. Apparently, performance in productive
skills is viewed by learners as more important than in receptive skills along the lines
of the theory of contingencies of self-worth. Their perceived competence in English
is first and foremost the ability to use it in spoken and written communication,
which is actually harder to acquire than listening and reading comprehension skills.
Grades and other forms of teachers’ assessment have been indicated as formative
for self-esteem in specific subjects (Hoge, Smit, & Hanson, 1990). Conversely,
specific academic self-esteem is believed to have a notable relationship with grades.
Positive affect is likely to cause enthusiasm and willingness to explore the unknown
and accomplish tasks, which are of immense value in the process of learning.
Positive emotions, such as interest and curiosity enhance achievement because
interested students are naturally driven to seek their aims (Valiente, Swanson, &
Eisenberg, 2012). What is worth reminding is, that people’s self-esteem is sensitive
to the outcomes in domains which they consider as important (Crocker & Wolfe,
2001; Vonk & Smit, 2011). If proficiency in English or any other foreign language
is a contingency of self-worth for a learner, the success or failure in learning the
language is likely to affect their self-view. It is an indication that English is per-
ceived as the high status language. Such a belief is probably derived from the sheer
120 4 Discussion
observation of the world and the media, where English is shown as the most
influential global language—it is prevalent in films, music, IT, diplomacy, business,
etc., and it is actually the language of the most popular websites.
The image of a high/low FLSE student is enriched by the finding that the holder
of high FLSE boasts of high achievement in L2 and in the four essential (macro)
language skills, particularly in the productive ones (speaking and writing), and their
high FLSE is associated with the global assessment of one’s attainment. On the
other hand, low grades, low self-assessment of competence in macro skills belong
to the portrait of a learner whose FLSE is rather low.
4.2 Correlates and Predictors of Foreign Language

Self-esteem
Along with the exploration of the fluctuations of FLSE between secondary and
tertiary education, it is useful to investigate more thoroughly the concomitant
factors that will help gain a deeper insight into its environment. Therefore, the
second research question is going to be dealt with in the current section, that is:
What are the most significant correlates and predictors of FLSE?
The first question related to the factors that interact with the construct in focus
was posed to examine the relationship between specific (FLSE) and global
self-esteem. The results say that the constructs are positively correlated, so they
confirm the presupposition that students with high foreign language self-esteem
have higher global self-esteem in comparison to students with its low level.
Before discussing the results it seems worth referring to the hierarchical nature of
the concept of self-esteem. Global self-esteem, which is general self-worth, is
extended to domain-specific dimensions of non-academic or academic nature
(Shavelson, Hubner, & Stanton, 1976). Crocker and Wolfe (2001) used the term
contingencies to refer to specific facets of self-esteem, and they claimed that not all
types of contingencies are equally important to one’s global self-esteem. Only
successes and failures in the domains, which an individual finds important can
cause its rises and falls. The contingencies on which people base their self-worth are
varied. In the study, a half of the sample consisted of students who attended
extended courses of L2, which is an indication of their increased interest in it, and,
in accordance with the theoretical model reminded above, importance that FLSE
has for their general self-esteem. The other half of the sample were students who
followed standard courses of English, but it is cannot be excluded that its
weightiness was also quite marked for some of them.
Although the correlation between the global and specific self-esteem is positive,
its value is not very high. In an attempt at explaining the finding, another theoretical
claim is worth revisiting, according to which people who base their self-esteem on
extrinsic factors, such as other people’s approval, tend to have lower or less stable
self-esteem, while those with high intrinsic contingencies experience more positive
4.2 Correlates and Predictors of Foreign Language Self-esteem 121
affect (Crocker & Wolfe, 2001). In the light of this consideration it can be deduced
that the learners who derive their FLSE from the sheer approval of their teachers or
parents may suffer from some instability, and, consequently, its relationship with
global self-liking gets distorted. In conclusion, the symmetrical relationship
between the constructs under discussion implies that a learner whose L2 self-esteem
is high is likely to enjoy a high level of general self-liking, while the low L2
self-esteem one is also low in general self-views. It remains to be added that the
rather unimpressive magnitude of the correlation may be related to the diversity of
antecedents of self-esteem among the respondents, whose age makes it particularly
prone to extrinsic influences, responsible for less stability.
4.2.1 Demography-Related Correlates of Foreign Language

Self-esteem
Other aspects of the research question addressing the issue of selected character-
istics of a learner with high or low level of FLSE can be broadly categorized into
demography-related and school-related ones.
4.2.1.1 Gender
To begin with, the role of selected demographic factors is going to be examined.

One of them, which is claimed to be meaningful in the context of self-views is
gender. A prediction made for the purposes of the study was that female students
have lower FLSE than male students. Quite surprisingly, no correlation was
identified. In accordance with the results of copious research, female self-esteem is
argued to be slightly lower than male (Harper & Marshall, 1991; Harter, 1993;
Sullivan, 2009). The largest difference emerges in late adolescence (Pipher, 1994;
Kling, Hyde, Showers, & Buswell, 1999), which is relevant in the context of the
current study. In order to understand the reasons for the findings in the research,
self-esteem must be considered in the multidimensional perspective. For adolescent
males and females, the sense of self-worth may be related to different self-esteem
domains. Adolescent girls’ self-esteem may stem from success in domains such as
interpersonal functioning while boys self-esteem may be built on success in per-
sonal achievement (Knox, Funk, Elliott, & Bush, 1998). As a matter of fact,
attainment in L2 is of both personal and interpersonal nature as language is a tool
for interpersonal communication. Gender differences have also been noticed in
perceived success in varied domains of academic functioning. The specific
self-esteem of adolescent males is strongly related to Mathematics, while for
females it is linked with verbal skills (Harter, 1999; Marsh, 1989; Manning, Bear, &
Minke, 2006). According to one of the pioneers in the topic, James (1890)
self-esteem depends on success in areas that are important to an individual. As the
122 4 Discussion
sample consisted of students following intensive/extended and non-extended L2

courses in 50/50% proportions, one can deduce, that for the extended part of the
sample English was a domain that they attached more importance to than the other
half. Therefore, regardless of their gender, for the followers of extended language
courses, L2 was a significant contingency of self-liking, and the effect it had on
FLSE outdid that of gender. Summing up, a high/low FLSE learner is female or
male with the same degree of likelihood. FLSE is not determined by the variable in
secondary schools and colleges or universities.
4.2.1.2 Place of Residence
It was posited that students from small towns and villages have lower foreign
language self-esteem than students from large cities. The participants living in a
city enjoy the highest level of FLSE, before the inhabitants of towns, who, in turn,
reported higher FLSE than the inhabitants of small places with a population of up to
2500. The place of residence plays an important role in a learner’s life and
development (Weissbrot-Koziarska, 2005). Rural or and urban residential location
differ in culture, morality, the nature of social relations and educational styles
(Bogdan, 2011). In villages and little towns the access to high-quality education is
limited due to scarcity of best-qualified teachers and economic strain caused by
low-wage employment. Other than that, life in such little communities usually
means poorer prospects for future education and work. The rural educational and
economic constraints, together with lower availability of the most modern educa-
tional resources are bound to affect rural students’ sense of academic self-esteem.
As predicted, the level of FLSE differs significantly according to the place of
residence. The lowest values were obtained by students from villages, which is in
accordance with the above considerations on lower educational aspirations,
lower-quality educational facilities and economic strain. Additionally, rural students
often take more time to commute to schools, as lower and upper secondary schools,
not to mention universities, are located in larger places. Consequently, they are left
with less time to study, pursue their hobbies and interests, etc., which is a threat to
their self-confidence when they are confronted with their non-rural class/group
mates. The schools in the study were all located in places with a population of over
45,000, so the rurality complex, impairing L2 self-esteem was most probably an
issue of quite a remarkable proportion of students. The informants from towns
reported higher levels of FLSE. They enjoyed more choice of educational facilities
and better qualified instructors, as well as more prosperous social background. Still,
they were outdone by those dwelling in cities, which came as no surprise. The
urban students had the broadest access to prominent schools offering advanced
courses of English, top expert teachers, including native speakers, foreign exchange
programs, etc. Also, they had a notably easier access to extracurricular activities,
such as courses run by private language schools or other academic events. No
wonder they felt more confident in the domain of the English language. The results
add a new feature to the portrait of a high FLSE student, i.e., they come from a city
or big town, which cannot be said about a low FLSE learner whose residential
location is rural. The findings confirm those reported by Bogdan (2011) but they
have been obtained from a larger sample, divided into cohorts, representing three
stages of education.
4.2.1.3 The Role of Significant Others
Another demographic factor which specified the role of significant others in

building FLSE was the presence of close relatives who speak English. It was
proposed that students whose closest relatives know English, have higher foreign
language self-esteem than those whose family do not know the foreign language.
The statistic calculations confirmed that the students who had close relatives that
spoke English reported higher FLSE than students who had no relatives with such
an attribute.
As explained in Chap. 1, processes essential in the development of self-worth,
occur in the context of family interactions (Coopersmith, 1967). Parents usually act
as mentors and as the first significant others for children. There are numerous
factors that can mitigate this effect, such as personalities of the parents and the
children, and economic or employment stresses on the family. However, excluding
extreme situations, it can be said with a high degree of certainty, that the skills and
abilities that parents possess set up certain standards for children. The fact that a
parent (or both) speaks a foreign language makes it more attainable and natural. At
the same time, it helps to prevent a child from forming prejudices and inhibitions,
which might lead to language anxiety, and, ultimately, low L2 self-esteem. There is
a risk that a parent who has taken an unsuccessful attempt at learning a foreign
language may have a negative effect on their child’s attitude to L2, or, conversely,
invest effort in encouraging her or him to learn (as a compensation for their
unfulfilled ambition). The role of siblings who speak English may be slightly less
formative for a learner’s FLSE, but, likewise, their example is bound to show the
language as ‘learnable’ and practical.
In the generation of parents of the study participants (approximately 40 years of
age), the knowledge of English (or other foreign languages) cannot be taken for
granted. In their schooling years courses of English were not available to all stu-
dents due to the shortage of qualified teachers. Other languages used to be taught
with a heavy emphasis on grammar and little real-life-like practice. The respondents
who reported English-speaking relatives possibly came from higher status families,
where parents had attended prominent schools that offered good courses of English,
or studied it independently. Family background in which knowledge of foreign
languages is perceived as useful is more likely to support their children in their
striving to learn it, and thereby boost their L2-related self-views. Another possi-
bility is that the respondents who reported having close family members who spoke
English meant their siblings. Due to the wording of the respective question in the
questionnaire, which asked if anybody at home “knows English” (in Polish: “zna
124 4 Discussion
angielski”), it can be assumed that those who responded positively meant that their
brother or sister is able to communicate effectively. Again, it can be interpreted as
proof of parents’ concern about language education, and their supportive attitude to
their children’s efforts in the domain. Besides, the positive example of a brother or
sister who is a competent user of L2 is certain to exert a motivating influence on a
learner, and motivation, as it has been proved above, is interrelated with FLSE.
The silhouette of a high FLSE learner has been enriched by one more feature—
having close family members who pride themselves in speaking FL. By the same
token, a low FLSE student has no such advantage and inspiration.
4.2.2 Educational Correlates of Foreign Language

Self-esteem
The educational correlates of FLSE deserve special attention as they represent the
area that remains under the impact of ELT professionals, and their power can be
modified in the course of day-by-day practices.
4.2.2.1 The Attitude to the Teacher
As far as the role of significant others is concerned, it was believed that the learner
who likes their teacher of L2 possesses higher FLSE than a negatively minded one.
The discussion of the results commences the section on the characteristics that
relate to the educational domain. Educational experience is the context in which the
sense of self-worthiness performs a vital role. Cognitive processes are intermingled
with affective responses and the learner’s emotional frame of mind contributes
substantially to academic performance. The findings fully corroborate the claim,
and it is worth starting with the discussion with reminding that it is not only in early
education that the bond between the students and the teacher has got a massive
impact on their academic, social and emotional outcomes. Throughout schooling
experience students who have positive relationships with their teachers have a
secure base for the development of self-esteem and positive outlook on their
educational prospects (Gallagher, 2016). Motivated and emotionally supported by
their teachers, students are more eager to take on educational challenges, and enjoy
improved self-regard when they have risen to them. It is highly probable that those
who developed sound FLSE have been given wise, motivating supervision over the
years of learning English. Meanwhile, negative feedback from the teacher, distorted
balance between approval and criticism, authoritarian teaching stance are serious
threats to students’ self-confidence and triggers to language anxiety.
Affect and cognition are considered as interrelated aspect of learning (Arnold,
2007; Krashen, 1982). Positive learning experiences evoke positive emotions, while
positive emotions facilitate cognitive processing. Memory processes are enhanced,
creativity is activated, etc., which gives rise to higher achievement in learning.

Besides, favourable attitudes (to the teacher) stimulate the learner to undertake
action to improve competence and aim at mastery. Understandably, such conduct
leads to positive effect on performance, and L2 self-esteem. Obviously, negative
attitudes to the teacher exert an opposite influence—they are responsible for anx-
iety, withdrawal, avoidance of public speaking, etc., and lower competence, which
inflicts damage to FLSE.
There is one more issue related to the linkage between FLSE and liking or
disliking the teacher. As it was mentioned before, all the cohorts in the sample faced
upcoming final exams. The upper secondary school leaving exams carry the most
weight as, they largely determine the future education, and, possibly, also
employment prospects. The upper secondary students obtained mean values of
FLSE that were very slightly lower than the lower secondary ones. The decline was
observed respectively in the extended and non-extended strands. In the light of the
findings, a comment on the role of the teachers appears worthwhile. The lower
achievers face the threat of performing poorly in the exams, and it may have been
the case that under the pressure of limited class time and oversized groups (15–18
students) some teachers resort to threats of failing the exams as the major method of
‘motivating’ the underperforming students. Such a solution is bound to escalate
tension and anxiety in students, lower their self-confidence and end up in deteri-
oration of the bond between them and the teacher. Even if it is not threats and
warnings that impair the rapport between the student and the teacher, it can be
assumed that an underachieving learner will not cherish friendly feelings to the
teacher who occasionally articulates her/his dissatisfaction or whose assessment of
the learner may be low. To put it briefly, a learner who declares that they like the
teacher is likely to be characterized by high FLSE, and, automatically, a learner
who takes no liking to their L2 teacher tend to be possess a lower level of the
feature.
4.2.2.2 Participation in Extracurricular Activities
Another factor that should be considered within the educational section is the
student’s participation in extracurricular activities, such as special interest groups,
courses in language schools, etc. The results corroborate the presupposition that
students who participate in extracurricular FL activities are higher in FLSE than
those who do not. The decision to enroll in such activities is voluntary, and it proves
that the student has positive beliefs about FL learning. S/he believes that s/he will
benefit from new opportunities and the extra work will produce desired perfor-
mance outcomes. There seems to be a reciprocal relationship between the partici-
pation in after-school activities and FLSE one leads to the other and vice versa.
Students who take up extracurricular activities expand their exposure to FL, and
become more proficient because the instruction time lengthens and opportunities for
practice increase. In a reversed situation, when the student avoids extra exposure,
their chances of improvement are withdrawn. Considering the previously described
126 4 Discussion
findings on the correlations between exposure time, proficiency and FLSE, it is only
natural to conclude that participation in extracurricular activities and L2 self-esteem
are inextricably related. The results prove that students who lack FL confidence
avoid any contact with the language beyond school, which leads to performance
deficits in class, and ultimately, prevents them from forming more positive foreign
language self-views. The sequence has features of a vicious circle which is hard to
break.
4.2.3 Personal Correlates and Predictors of FLSE
Along with the academic factors discussed above, personal variables make a sig-
nificant, unique contribution to the prediction of FLSE.
4.2.3.1 Ideal L2-Self
The prediction which is going to be discussed first says: students with a strong
vision of Ideal L2-Self have high foreign language self-esteem. The two constructs
proved to be strongly positively correlated, and the former was found to be a
predictor of the latter.
For a start, it is worth reminding that there is a measurable interplay between
self-esteem and Ideal L2-Self. Ideal L2-Self is viewed as one of the specific facets
of one’s ideal self, which is the future image of oneself in possessing all the most
desired attributes (Dörnyei, 2009). However, there is one condition for the claim to
hold true. The ideal self must comprise the knowledge of L2—the person the
learner would like to become has a good command of the language. Then the Ideal
L2-Self acts as a powerful motivating factor, because of the desire to reduce the
discrepancy between the actual and ideal selves, empowering the learner, giving
them a sense of efficacy, control and optimism. It provides a clear image, which
becomes a goal for the learner to pursue. The extent to which an individual per-
ceives their future self as likely to come true affects their self-esteem. Ideal L2-Self
together with Ought-to L2 Self (the person the learner feels an obligation to
become) are the components of L2 self-esteem but oriented towards the future.
Learners who have the lowest level of FLSE will find it harder to visualize
themselves as successful, competent language users, while those who have a sound
level of FLSE will easily envisage their highly proficient performance in L2. As
presented in the previous section, FLSE correlates positively with proficiency, so it
is indirectly implied that language attainment will have an impact on Ideal L2-Self
as well. To put it in practical terms, a higher level of language will enhance a
stronger sense of future (ideal) self. A strong positive correlation between Ideal
L2-Self and motivational intensity suggests that learner’s FLSE may have a pow-
erful impact on initiating and maintaining one’s willingness to expend effort in
learning. Besides, self-regulated behaviour, which is the ability to adapt to new
situations, take on challenges and control emotions, is hardly possible unless the
learner has a positive, vivid image of themselves as a user of the language (Dörnyei,
2009). The mean value of the Ideal L2-Self calculated for the whole sample
(M = 22.73) was compared with the results of Japanese university students (Suzuki,
2014) who were streamed into low-motivated, medium-motivated and
high-motivated and all obtained lower values (M = 10.79; M = 16.25; M = 22.28
respectively) in the same scale, so it is tempting to think that an average Polish
adolescent or young adult learner is able to conceive a self-vision of a successful
user of English in job-related or private circumstances. The position of English as
the leading foreign language in the Polish system of education and the length of
exposure (since the beginning of primary school or even earlier) facilitate positive
thinking about the prospects of future competences. Summing up, possible selves,
(Ideal L2-Self in particular), which are a powerful motivating mechanism are
deeply rooted in learners’ L2 self-esteem, because the outlook for the future
competence largely depends on how they perceive themselves currently.
4.2.3.2 Language Anxiety
Another factor whose relationship with FLSE was scrutinized was public speaking
anxiety. The belief concerning the linkage was articulated in the following way
students with low foreign language self-esteem are more anxious to communicate in
L2 than high foreign language self-esteem one. The analysis of the responses
obtained in the research allows to corroborate the hypothesis.
As proposed in Chap. 1, language learning, particularly classroom learning, is an
ego-involving experience that may bring great rewards, but also pose numerous
threats to self. Language anxiety and L2 self-esteem are inseparable in the context
of SLA as they are affected by similar kinds of experience. For example, a low level
of FLSE is one of the primary factors causing the students’ anxiety, predominantly
in speaking, but also in writing and other skills in English. It has been found that the
act of communication is notorious for inducing anxiety as the learner has to cope
with limited linguistic resources while trying to express a variety of meanings. S/he
may feel anxious that they are not themselves, and the linguistic limitations make
them sound stupid, which is potentially dangerous to FLSE. Spoken performance
activates one type of anxiety, i.e. fear of negative evaluation. Speaking in the
foreign language involves being judged by others—teachers, classmates, examin-
ers, etc. The awareness will be harder to cope with for learners with low sense of
self-worth as those with high self-esteem can better cope with negative feedback.
People with a heightened level of fear of evaluation are anxious about making
mistakes and causing a negative impression (Piechurska-Kuciel, 2008). The tea-
cher’s expectation of flawless performance or critical response may additionally
strengthen the feeling of self-consciousness, and, ultimately, further impair a
learner’s self-esteem. In the light of the findings related to RQ1 (FLSE and the level
of proficiency) and the current issue, low FLSE goes together with low proficiency,
so, the more limited the student feels in linguistic expression, the lower his/her L2
128 4 Discussion
self-esteem is, and the more anxious they feel. Besides, the artificiality of classroom
communication, which is often conjured up for practice purposes (unlike sponta-
neous, authentic communication) gives rise to increased speaking anxiety, and
lowers self-confidence. Broadly speaking, both affective factors in question derive
from either the learner, or the teacher, or the classroom or the interaction between
the three (Zheng, 2008). The causal relationships among them are complicated and
the direction of causality is hard to define, but their the reciprocal nature remains
unquestionable. The high correlation between the constructs invites a supposition
that their growth or decline are to a certain extent proportionate. Additionally, the
finding that FL anxiety acts as a predictor of FLSE implies that an increase of
foreign language communication anxiety will have co-occurred with a notable
decrease in FLSE in upper secondary students. The change seems highly feasible as
the 3rd-class upper secondary students in Poland face upcoming school-leaving
exams (Matura examination) and their anxiety is bound to be enhanced. The exams
are loaded with major importance as their results are the most essential factor taken
into consideration in the process of admission to universities and colleges. The
English language syllabi are designed with a view to the exams, classroom practice
is planned according to the exam structure, and the topic is by all means a hot issue,
particularly in the final class. It is obvious that a lot is on stake, and under that kind
of pressure, foreign language anxiety inevitably grows. As a matter of fact, the
importance of the oral part is outweighed by the written one, and, it may well be the
case that teachers devote the lion’s share of class time to practice towards the
written examination. In consequence, students who do not get enough opportunities
for oral improvement will suffer from inhibitions and heightened anxiety. Lower
secondary 3rd-graders also study English towards final exams but their importance
is not so high because admission/recruitment to upper secondary schools is not so
competitive as to universities. Besides, their plans and ambitions for the future are
usually less definite than those of final year upper secondary students, so there is
less tension at the transition stage. For this reason, language anxiety, and its con-
stituent part, i.e. public speaking anxiety, are not enhanced excessively. The college
level participants in the current study did not face any exceptional challenges
connected with English language learning. The end-of-year exams that were ahead
of them did not have such a decisive role to play for their future prospects. Besides,
the groups under research were more homogenous than the younger ones—they
were either majoring in English or non-majoring in English.
The level of the group being more unified, the students do not feel particularly
anxious while performing in front of their group mates. Therefore, their anxiety was
not strengthened by their impact. In conclusion, the high FLSE language learner
who experiences low communication anxiety will learn the spoken language better
than a lower FLSE one who has experienced high anxiety because high self-esteem
accompanied by low anxiety positively affects students’ attitudes towards learning
the target language and motivation (as explicated in the previous section) both in
academic settings and beyond.
4.2.3.3 Learning Strategies
Another correlate of FLSE which was investigated was the intensity of use of
learning strategies. The relationship between the variables was conveyed by means
of the following claim: students with high foreign language self-esteem use different
language learning strategies when compared to low foreign language self-esteem
ones. The findings corroborate the claim that a high FLSE learner uses different FL
learning strategies than their low FLSE counterpart.
Effective learning involves the learner’s self-management abilities, such as
active planning, monitoring and self-assessment and the use of language learning
strategies, which are specific actions, behaviours, or solutions used by students to
enhance their own learning, for instance looking for conversation partners, giving
oneself encouragement to cope with a challenging language task, etc. (Oxford in
Kostić-Bobanowić & Ambrosi-Randić, 2008). Generally, it has been postulated that
it is the attitudes, behaviours and strategies learners engage in learning that deter-
mine whether or not they will be able to grasp the intricacies of language (Nunan,
2000; Oxford, 1990). So called “Good Language Learners” have been found to be
active users of a range of strategies that account for their success to a large extent
(Rubin & Thompson, 1983; Thompson, 2005). Yet, the undisturbed, efficient use of
the abilities and strategies requires that the individual’s concentration is uninhibited
by negative emotions such as the fear of failure and fear of impairing one’s own
self-worth. Thus, a positive view of one’s worth and ability is a necessary pre-
requisite for active learning. The results of the study are in line with the claims, and
they resonate with those of Kostić-Bobanović and Ambrosi-Randić (2008), who
proved that increased L2 self-esteem caused effective use of appropriate strategies
and vice versa. The better the participants perceived themselves as language
learners, the more frequently they reported exploiting highly efficient mental
models, regulating their learning and interacting with others. It is notable that
students who have had a longer exposure to the language use Good Learner
strategies much more often than the ones with shorter exposure (Oxford, 1990). As
reported above, the current research results prove that learners with higher FLSE
use the appropriate strategies more often. Keeping in mind that FLSE correlates
positively with the length of exposure (see Sect. 4.1), one may assume that the
longer the students have studied the language, the better they tend to think of
themselves, and the more often they use efficient strategies, for instance repeating,
translating, setting goals, seeking for practice opportunities, etc. They have accu-
mulated more learning experience that involved dealing with a wider range of tasks
and requirements.
The correlation under discussion was of moderate strength, which may require a
brief comment. It is probable that the students do not have proper explicit or
implicit strategy training. Therefore, they did not have much to report in the survey.
There is copious theory and empirical evidence for a need to teach systematically
adequate learning strategies for the purpose of learning enhancement (O’Malley &
Chamot, 1990; Oxford, 1990; Wenden, 1998). Some practitioners may take it for
granted, though, that their students use strategies intuitively. However, without the
130 4 Discussion
teacher devoting attention to the matter, learners (not only the less successful ones)
will use fewer strategies, and their strategies will be of limited types (Nyikos in
Gimeno, 2002). It is unquestionable, that they would benefit from learning them
under the instruction from the teacher. Strategy training is much more effective if
learners are made aware of its value and purpose and they undergo modelling of
strategic thinking, followed by practice and self-evaluation (Božinović & Syndik,
2011). It is possible that time constraints in classroom settings or insufficient
awareness of the importance of strategy training on the part of the teachers may
have pushed this aspect of language teaching into insignificance. Alternatively, a
certain proportion of students who actually reported using a lot of strategies could
not boast high L2 self-esteem due to criticism from the significant others, unfa-
vourable social comparisons or some recent experience of failure. The develop-
mental fluctuations in self-related views were explained in the initial section of the
Discussion. Summing up, the study revealed that it can be predicted with a mod-
erate degree of certainty that students with high linguistic self-confidence use
effective learning strategies more frequently than their low self-confidence coun-
terparts. An active use of them is a feature of efficient learning so, as a consequence,
low FLSE learners suffer from a severe disadvantage in the process. The deficiency
might be compensated by strategy training integrated into classroom practice, but
that requires well-informed instructors and sparing some precious lesson time,
which, under the pressure of upcoming exams may seem sparse.
4.2.3.4 Learning Beliefs
In an attempt to build a fairly comprehensive list of FLSE correlates from the

domain of foreign language learning, the following conjecture was posed: students
with high foreign language self-esteem have different language learning beliefs
than those with low foreign language self-esteem. The results of the survey have
confirmed the hypothesis—FLSE correlated positively with beliefs about language
learning.
Learner beliefs, like L2 self-esteem, are one of the facets of the affective domain.
In accordance with the theoretical models discussed in Chap. 1, the affective
domain participates in cognitive operations in various ways. For example, experi-
encing positive affect stimulates creativity, facilitates creative problem solving, or
triggers pleasurable emotions such as enjoyment or enthusiasm, etc., which enhance
performance (Piasecka, 2013). Contrariwise, negative affective experiences are
responsible for deficits in memory and attention (Payne & Schnapp, 2014).
Additionally, negative affect may impede one’s ability to retrieve data stored in
long-term memory (Arnold, 1999). A low FLSE learner, who is characterized by
negative affect (Branden, 1995), will experience these cognitive deficits and form
negative beliefs about language learning, while his/her more self-confident coun-
terpart will enjoy a cognitive advantage, and consequently develop positive beliefs.
Besides, positive feelings of self-worth facilitate persistence after failure
(Fila-Jankowska, 2009). Its holders will be less prone to set negative beliefs about
language learning after an unpleasant learning experience.
Beliefs and attitudes, which influence learner motivation to persevere in trying to
learn, reflect the sense of efficacy that underlies domain-specific self-esteem. It is
highly probable that learners who believe that they do not possess adequate skills
will avoid tasks that require those skills (Bernat & Gvozdenko, 2005). Negative
beliefs inevitably hamper progress, even for the learner who understands all the
technical aspects how to learn a new language. More specifically, negative
self-beliefs (the exponents of low self-esteem) consume some of cognitive potential,
as some energy is wasted on canceling out their impact, and, consequently, less
energy is left for the task as such. Learning becomes less effective, which poses a
threat to self-liking. The sequence has all characteristics of a vicious circle. As it
was posited in Chap. 1, beliefs act as perceptual filters—if a learner maintains a
belief that he cannot learn a language, he probably cannot unless he changes his
belief. In contrast, positive beliefs can make language learning far more effective
(and enjoyable). They encourage active involvement with goal pursuits
(Lyubomirsky et al., 2005). It was found in the study that FLSE correlates with L2
proficiency, which allows a deduction that teenage learners who attend intensive
courses grow awareness of competence (self-efficacy, which is the expression of
specific self-esteem), form positive beliefs about language learning, and they keep
them till their early twenties as they progress in L2. The analysis of the results
shows that learners who are low in FLSE believe that only some gifted people can
learn English well. They perceive English grammar and pronunciation as difficult
and crucial to success in language study. These beliefs may be viewed as mis-
conceptions that are responsible for wrong goal setting, and consequently, on
discovering that the goals cannot be met, for a decline in FLSE. The learner who
believes that mastery in grammar is the prerequisite for success will be discouraged
or devastated by committing errors in speaking or writing, ignoring the fact that
fluency takes precedence over accuracy in communication. Observing the dis-
crepancy between native English and learner pronunciation may result in com-
munication anxiety, or in extreme cases, withdrawal from speaking in public. Such
mental structures are destructive and are likely to lead to behaviours that end up in
failure, thus fossilizing negative beliefs and ultimately impairing L2
self-confidence.
Learners’ beliefs and emotions play a critical role in forming social relationships,
but the interaction is bi-directional—relations with the teacher and with the class-
mates make a difference to a learner’s mindset (Dewaele, 2011).
A security-building classroom experience is likely to stimulate their need to create
and maintain these social affiliations. Conversely, unsupportive atmosphere may be
perceived by a learner as threatening, and may lead to withdrawal. The results of the
study show that learners who have formed negative beliefs about learning English,
may not have been offered sufficient support throughout the secondary and tertiary
education, and their L2 self-esteem remained low. Low self-esteem people
overemphasize their affiliations with others and they require far more positive
feedback from their instructors, added to mutual respect. The more positive beliefs
132 4 Discussion
holders, (who were also higher in FLSE), most probably enjoyed approval and good
rapport with the teacher or built their learner confidence on other pillars such as, for
example past experience.
4.3 Students with High and Low FLSE
Eventually, the profile of a student whose level of FLSE is either remarkably high
or just the opposite is going to be completed with information gathered in the
qualitative part of the research. The results resonate with the characteristics iden-
tified in the quantitative part and add some more that make the portraits more
complete. The first part of the discussion refers to learners with high levels of L2
self-esteem.
4.3.1 The Characteristics of Students with High FLSE
4.3.1.1 L1 Acquisition and Early L2 Learning
One of the parts of the interviews, which concerned early L1 acquisition experi-
ence, reveals that a student with high FLSE learns to speak quite early, or at a
“normal” rate, like other children their age. It happens that they learn to write
remarkably early. S/he does not experience any special difficulties—speech
impediments that require the help of a speech therapist. The early processing of
linguistic data as part of First Language Acquisition occurs smoothly, which is a
hint that the learner may have a flair for languages, and that their highly successful
acquisition (faster and involving less effort) results from their better linguistic skills
(Dąbrowska, 2012). Carroll postulates the existence of four factors in language
aptitude: phonemic coding ability, grammatical sensitivity, inductive language
learning ability and rote learning ability. Skehan (1989) propounds that the rela-
tively efficient linguistic processing is transferred to L2 or L3 learning. In the light
of the finding that FLSE is positively correlated with achievement in L2, the
inference seems quite justified. The early L2 learning memories are pleasant, there
are no memories of stress, anxiety or boredom. Probing into the interviewees early
learning stories shows that they enjoyed the playful atmosphere and teaching
techniques—singing songs, playing Hangman and other language games, elements
of drama, etc. The informed choice of methods and techniques indicates that the
students were lucky to encounter well-qualified early primary (or pre-primary)
teachers of English who laid foundations for their positive attitude to the subject
and, thus, gave rise to their L2 self-esteem. The interviewees articulated their
appreciation for the teachers, who were capable of capturing the pupils’ attention
and motivating them. Looking at the finding from a different angle, undisturbed
early L2 learning may be associated with what has been said about the well-timed,
4.3 Students with High and Low FLSE 133
effective L1 acquisition, i.e. the high FLSE learner is efficient in processing any
linguistic information. A well-begun FL learning is an anticipation of its success at
further stages. As it has been emphasized earlier, positive affect enhances cognitive
operations, which, in turn, leads to high achievement and, ultimately has a moti-
vating effect on the learner.
4.3.1.2 Selected Personality Traits
Another objective of the qualitative study was probing into selected personality
characteristics of self-confident L2 learners. Caspi, Roberts, and Shiner, (2005)
associate high self-esteem with extraverted personality, in particular with being
outgoing, sociable and expressive. Indeed, all of the high FLSE informants
admitted they were good with people, although some of them made reservations
that they preferred interacting with more intimate groups of friends rather than in
large ensembles. Individuals with sound self-esteem feel secure and accepted in
their social groups, and they are not afraid of speaking their mind. The trait prevails
in L2 interactions as well—none of the interviews contains any complains about
barriers or inhibitions in communication in English. On the contrary, it is possible
that a fairly quiet individual’s outspokenness increases when they switch to L2. The
new identity assumed in L2 let the person overcome the apparent shyness that s/he
might have occasionally experienced while communicating in their native language.
Another of the interviewees concedes that her friends made her a spokesperson
during a trip abroad as she has no trouble talking to others in either language. It
corroborates the claims made by Robins, Trzesniewski, Tracy, Gosling, and Potter,
(2002) that high self-esteem holders are agreeable and open to new experience.
They are not paralyzed by uncertainty and fear of failure—contrarily, they are more
of risk-takers. Another trait that the described behaviour reflects is ascribing
socially desirable characteristics to oneself, that high self-esteem individuals do not
hesitate to do.
4.3.1.3 Mastery Experiences and the Role of Significant People
One of the outcomes of self-esteem is the sense of self-efficacy, which is a person’s

belief in their capability of succeeding in a particular situation. Among the most
important sources of self-efficacy are mastery experiences—a successful perfor-
mance of a task raises one’s sense of self-efficacy, while failure to perform well can
undermine it. Pajares and Schunk (2001) explain that self-views are derived from
past attainments in situations which a learner perceives as similar to the new one.
So, when s/he is familiar with the demands of an activity they are bound to
approach it with a judgement of confidence that is rooted in earlier experience with
a similar activity. The interviews contain descriptions of the learners’ successful
oral communication experiences that ignited the sense of satisfaction in them, and,
following the claims by Pajares and Schunk (2001), gave them increased
134 4 Discussion
self-confidence for future acts of communication. The beliefs in one’s capability

(self-efficacy) make an important contribution to the prediction of performance,
which results in success being not so much a matter of capability itself, but more a
matter of self-belief. As proved by the study, achievement in speaking correlates
positively with FLSE, which makes the experiences reported by the participants
even more meaningful.
Another mastery experience explored in the study is receiving teacher’s praise in
class. Although specified only by one interviewee (a high grade for a test), the very
act of being appreciated by an instructor carries enough emotional load to be
remembered and perceived as FLSE-boosting. The teacher’s motivating power is
appreciated and emphasized by the interviewees. Not only is positive feedback
considered as vital, but also teachers’ encouragement and trust in their students’
potential. The support of significant others is extremely formative for the learners’
self-liking. Incidentally, when asked about their role models, whose command of
English is inspiring, the high FLSE learners indicate native speakers, or people who
speak with native-like fluency. It shows that they set themselves ambitious goals,
which they see within their reach, though. People who have high self-esteem tend to
have a strong sense of purpose and are committed to once established goals in life,
which means that they are consistent at pursuing them. Nonetheless, they strive for
excellence, not for perfection (Frank, 2011). A high FLSE learner tends to bounce
back after a failure, and is likely to eradicate negative experience from memory.
Hardly any of the interviewees recollects any unpleasant moments or situations that
would have rendered them disappointed with the quality of their performance.
4.3.1.4 Self-Selected Extra Language Practice
The interviewees, whose FLSE reaches the highest values report that they look for
opportunities to practise English beyond school. The most popular choice is spoken
communication practice—chatting on-line, jumping at every chance to converse
while abroad or even talking in English to a family member at home. Again, it
corroborates the claims by Pajares and Schunk (2001) that mastery experiences
pave the way for future performances of a similar kind, i.e. individuals who have
experienced success in communication are more likely to undertake another chal-
lenge, free of inhibitions and anxiety. The interviewees perform online interactions
with peers, which makes it highly probable that the communication is more sym-
metrical and natural than class exchanges, which may seem at times artificial or
stressful (when assessed by the teacher). Another self-selected way of practising L2
after school is reading websites in English. The very fact that the Internet resources
are infinite makes it possible for every user to find something at the right level of
factual and linguistic complexity. This unprecedented flexibility and unlimited
access to all kinds of genres enhances the feeling of self-efficacy in learners who
have gained some experience in surfing the Internet in search of interesting infor-
mation. They receive a tangible proof of their comprehension skills, and, ultimately
get their FLSE boosted. Apart from speaking or reading activities, the informants
try translating song lyrics or watching undubbed series on television. Both of these
activities are forms of entertainment, so they are selected for pleasure and they
certainly have pleasant associations. A positive mindset has been found to have a
stimulating effect on cognitive processes that language learning involves, which, in
turn is influential for learner FLSE.
4.3.1.5 Academic Achievement
Last but not least, academic achievement operationalized by GPA came into focus
(the value of GPA was quite high, i.e. between 4.5 and 5.0 in four cases, and 4.2 in
the remaining one). The students with high L2 achievement and high FLSE can
pride themselves in high general academic achievement. Language aptitude
co-occurs with intelligence (Grabiec, http://www.publikacje.edu.pl/pdf/7970.pdf).
Interestingly, empirical studies reveal a significant relationship between intelligence
and learning a foreign language but only as far as academic skills are concerned.
Learners who have high IQ achieve better results on language tests. It has been
found that intelligence can predict the rate and success of FL learning in the formal
language classroom (Genesee, 1981). Oddly enough, the ability to perform well in
standard intelligence tests correlates highly with school foreign language learning in
school settings, but is does not relate with the learning of the second language for
informal and social functions (Spolsky, 1989). All of the informants spent most of
their language learning time in formal language lessons, so the correlation between
IQ and FLSE appears explicable.
4.3.2 The Characteristics of Students with Low FLSE
4.3.2.1 L1 Acquisition and Early L2 Learning
The mother tongue acquisition turns out to have been less smooth. Impairment of
the articulation of speech sounds which required an intervention of a speech
therapist, delayed speech (in comparison with siblings), motor development notably
preceding language development may all be interpreted as mild cases of acquisition
difficulties or deficits. They were unrelated to any mental retardation, but only slight
distortions from the norm, but still, they account for one of the distinctions between
the two groups of interviewees. If Skehan’s (1989) claim about transferability of
language aptitude between all the languages acquired by the learner is sustained,
then the slight hindrances in First Language Acquisition of low FLSE learners,
whose achievement in L2 is also rather modest, are entirely justifiable. Predictably,
none of the interviewees is able to share any story of exceptionally early devel-
opment of speech.
As regards early FL learning, the memories are not particularly heartening. To
remind the most meaningful reflections—the initial difficulties are blamed on
136 4 Discussion
teachers, who failed to motivate the classes and adjust the teaching style to the age
requirements of early primary children. Besides, there is a straightforward com-
plaint that lessons were boring and the children had to write a lot in their notebooks,
or that the activities were difficult (for example written tests). The L1 acquisition
and L2 learning stories corroborate the above mentioned assertion that
first-language and second-language acquisition conform to the same patterns and
may be effected by similar neurological processes. According to Ushakova (1994:
154), ‘the second language is incorporated into the classification system already
available in the first language, relies on the previously developed semantic system,
and actively employs first language phonology (…). To put it figuratively, second
language is looking into the windows cut out by the first language’. The reports of
the informants consolidate the assumption that the rate and course of mother tongue
acquisition may be indicative of prospects for success in early L2 learning.
The leit motiv of the research, i.e. the claim that cognitive and affective aspects
of language learning are inextricable can be quoted again as part of interpretation of
the interviewees’ stories. Negative emotions generated for various reasons at the
onset of the long-lasting foreign language learning experience may well have
afflicted current and future cognitive processing, and thus lower achievement,
which, in turn, decreased the learners’ self-efficacy, and, ultimately L2 self-esteem.
The emotional and rational domains can be viewed as communicating vessels,
where the mutual influences are overwhelming, and cause far-reaching
consequences.
4.3.2.2 Selected Personality Traits
The main area of interest in the personality-related section of the interviews is the
position of the learners on the extravert—introvert continuum. The diverse results
cannot be regarded as conclusive as the interviewees represent the full scope of
variation in this respect. There is a person who feels unintimidated in the company
of only one friend, and one who denies any inhibitions in communication, but the
majority find it natural to communicate in a small circle of people that they know
well. There are no striking differences between the high and low FLSE cohorts—the
representatives of both agree that how outspoken they are depends on the size and
the chemistry of the group. Unlike communication in the native language, the
exchanges in English are perceived as a serious challenge. One person has expe-
rienced some derogatory reactions from the classmates while speaking L2 in public,
others, anxiety-ridden admit to giving up any attempts to speak up. Speaking was
found in the research to correlate with FLSE more strongly than any other language
skill, the more so in front of a large audience, that a typical school class can be
called. Being overcritical towards self-committed mistakes, which a ubiquitous trait
of low self-esteem individuals prevents them from undertaking the risk of public
performance that may make them an object of ridicule. The truth is that if one
expects to fail, they are very likely to fail, which is a matter of a self-fulfilling
prophecy. So, a learner who regularly refrains from practice will experience
difficulty in expressing their message and commit mistakes, which will cause fur-
ther withdrawal from practice and close the vicious circle.
4.3.2.3 Mastery Experiences and the Role of Significant People
The situations when the learners feel satisfaction with their performance in English
have one important feature in common. All of them have occurred beyond school,
away from the classmates and the teacher, whose anxiety-evoking influence was
mentioned in the previous section. The students do not look for the opportunities to
practise L2; apparently, they are forced to communicate by the situation they have
found themselves in. But they respond to the challenge positively as they are not
intimidated by the stressing presence of people who knew their limitations. It
corresponds with the description of psychological functioning of a low self-esteem
person (Branden, 1995). It is worth emphasizing that the teachers’s role is essential
in the context of students’ self-confidence. For most students, it reflects the
appraisals of their teachers. Positive appraisals motivate learners, and enhance
learning, while prolonged negative appraisals run counter to learners’ commitment
and effort investment. Fully justified seems the claim that students perform pro-
portionately to their teacher expectations and feedback. The students crave for their
praise, and they emphasize that it tastes best when they receive it in front of their
classmates, which, according to their reports does not occur frequently. Only two of
the interviewees mentioned that they are given positive verbal feedback in class,
and, obviously they find it really propelling. The others feel that they have a rather
permanent (low) position in the class ranking scale, and they do not deserve any
recognition for their performance, which makes them rather dispirited.
Other people whose impact is relevant to the topic are role models, whose
mastery in English the interviewees admire. By and large, they are non-native
speakers who successfully use the language for practical purposes. It is sufficient to
acquire the ability to converse with foreigners in the street or occasionally use
English in job-related circumstances if a need arises. There is a discrepancy in this
respect between the high and low FLSE students, as the latter ones realistically
lower their aspirations to the working knowledge of L2, in contrast with the former
for whom native-like level is the ultimate goal. It may appear only natural that
university students majoring in English aim at high proficiency, but it also holds
true for the secondary level informants. They also set themselves ambitious goals
which seem attainable in the perspective of their solid L2 self-views. Asked about
some frustrating experience with FL, most of the interviewees decline to remember
(or disclose) any events. Only one person utters a complaint about difficulties with
remembering vocabulary and using some more challenging grammar structures in
practice. The students sound as if they have become emotionally detached and their
indifference is a kind of shield against disappointment. In consonance with the
theoretical models described in Chap. 1, the psychological mechanism is referred to
as disengagement. It consists in shifting emphasis from an area where success is
hard to achieve to alternative domains in order to avoid drops in global self-esteem.
138 4 Discussion
The student realizes that s/he may not excel at English, but s/he is quite good at
computer studies and it compensates for the underachievement in FL (Vonk &
Smit, 2011).
4.3.2.4 Self-Selected Extra Language Practice
The interviews reveal that low FLSE learners do not necessarily seek for extra
practice that could improve their attainment. The only occurrences of additional
language practice are exchanging commands while playing computer games or
occasional attempts at translating song lyrics, which is not indicative of a great
initiative on the part of the learners. They are simply incidental encounters with
English that may be viewed as side effects of activities that are performed for their
own sake rather than targeted at language practice. Apparently, the students lack
motivation and enthusiasm that would drive them towards self-selected extra
activity. It may be connected with the halfhearted attitude to the subject that they
demonstrated throughout the interviews. Having experienced some initial difficul-
ties in the first years of language learning, failing to receive enough encouragement
in class, the learners must have assumed a defensive stance towards the subject and
keep a low profile. Such an attitude is an example of avoidance, i.e. a defense
mechanism that consists in withdrawing from unpleasant situations.
4.3.2.5 Academic Achievement
In an attempt to discuss the academic achievement of the low FLSE students it is

worth repeating what has been stated in the corresponding part of the discussion of
high FLSE interview results, i.e. that the students with high L2 achievement and
high FLSE enjoy high general academic achievement as language aptitude corre-
lates with intelligence. So, the notably lower GPA values in the low FLSE cohort
only corroborate the claim. Furthermore, there is a significant relationship between
intelligence and learning a foreign language as far as academic skills are concerned
(Genesee, 1981). The interviews reveal that the students’ extracurricular L2
learning activity is rather scant, and, they confine themselves only to formal
classroom learning. Considering this, one may arrive at an inescapable conclusion
that a learner whose L2 self-esteem is low cannot boast of spectacular achievement
in L2, and, sadly, tends to be a lower achiever in other school subjects.
4.3.2.6 The Profiles of High and Low FLSE Learners
Given the results of the research, one may undertake the challenge of outlining a
profile of a learner who holds a high level of FLSE. It can be claimed that the
learner attends an intensive course of the language. As FLSE develops as a result of
one’s experiences with the environment, s/he is has a record of positive FL learning
experience—beginning with the early primary years, when fun and play that their
teacher incorporated in day-by-day teaching made the classroom work enjoyable
and motivating. Their FLSE grows moderately with learning experience, but it
sustains a slight decline in the upper secondary school. When teachers present a
positive environment for their students, the latter grow a positive attitude to them,
which is another trait observable in a high L2 self-esteem learner. Since significant
others play a crucial role in the development of self-related views, it is worth adding
that the learner’s parents or other close relatives speak the language and, presum-
ably exert their FLSE-boosting influence. The learner boasts of urban residence and
takes advantage of the opportunities to attend extracurricular activities in English or
improve their communication skills in authentic communication. S/he represents a
high standard of academic achievement, and assesses her/his skills in L2 very well.
The high FLSE learner is outspoken and has friendly relationships with peers, as
self-worth, whether in global or specific perspective is also a function of personality
and social influences. Incidentally, their global self-esteem is quite sound as well.
For the learner who has developed healthy L2-self esteem, external factors remain
in balance with personal goals and ambitions. They are high, and they are targeted
at native-like proficiency in English. The visions of their future Self comprise
highly competent use of English in job-related settings, which acts as a powerful
motivating force. The learner holds positive beliefs about FL learning and zestfully
uses learning strategies. They are not afraid to speak in public, as their language
anxiety remains low.
A learner who is low in FLSE attends a lower intensity language course, and is
less proficient when compared with his/her high FLSE counterpart. The early years
of learning English, which are formative for FLSE, did not leave positive memories.
Tests and tedious copying exercises had a very negative effect on the learner’s
attitude to FL. Their current achievement in L2 is rather modest, both in the teacher
and self-assessment perspective. They find it hard to recall an experience of sat-
isfaction in learning or in successful communication in the foreign language. They
do not try to improve their command of language by attending extracurricular
activities.
The low FLSE learner lives in a small community, and their closest relatives do
not speak English. In terms of social life, they feel secure in rather small, intimate
groups of friends. Their global sense of self-worthiness is not high. Having a low
self-image, they do not set themselves exorbitant goals in learning. It does not come
easy to generate a future self-image of somebody who is capable of performing in
L2 efficiently and effortlessly. Consequently, the substantive role of such a moti-
vating vision is severely reduced. The learning beliefs convey a rather intimidating
image of the FL learning experience—English appears to be harder than other
languages, its grammar too complex, and the vocabulary too extensive. The learner
feels debilitated by language anxiety, and remembers being ridiculed by the
classmates for making a mistake while speaking. They deny feeling supportive
feedback from the teacher.
140 4 Discussion
The aim of this chapter was to discuss the findings of the study. They largely
legitimize the theoretical claims and conform with the models reviewed in Chap. 1.
The investigation into the relationships between learners’ foreign language
self-esteem and some vital aspects of foreign language aspects has proved that the
focal construct is an immensely weighty ingredient of learning. Its level increases
only moderately with the length of learning experience, but soars quite robustly
with the intensity of instruction and proficiency perceived as self-assessment or
grades. Any further increase of time of exposure to L2, be it in the form of
participation in special interest groups, private lessons or playful activities (games,
on-line chats, watching films in English, etc.), is intertwined with the improved
foreign-language self-image. And the self-image is tightly related with such vital
factors in the context of L2 learning as motivation, learning beliefs, foreign lan-
guage anxiety, the use of learning strategies, etc. FLSE is significantly correlated
with a range of personal educational and out-of-school factors, such as the place of
residence, having somebody who speaks English at home or liking the L2 teacher,
to mention just a few. The qualitative part of the research has shown that the
teacher’s role is momentous for the learner’s self-liking. A wise instructor can
probably help overcome the demographic disadvantages and manage teaching and
learning in a way that ignites enthusiasm and generates positive emotions that
sound foreign language self-esteem is one of the most desirable dimensions of. The
purpose of the next chapter is to present the model of foreign language self-esteem
elaborated on the basis of the current research findings, followed by implications for
further research and recommendations for EFL classroom practices.
Chapter 5
Conclusions and Implications
for the EFL Classroom
The final chapter aims at discussing the importance of the book for the second
language classroom and drawing conclusions from the theoretical and empirical
research. Other than that, the chapter is directed at indicating alternative research
designs, instruments or hypotheses to be explored in future in relation to the topic of
foreign language self-esteem Subsequently, teaching recommendations and impli-
cations of the findings for the teacher, the learner and the teaching material designer
ensuing from the results of the current research are going to be discussed.
5.1 The Purpose of the Book
The main objective of the book was to inquire into the construct of foreign language
self-esteem and its interplay with proficiency in L2, demographic factors and
selected aspects of L2-learning. The research combined quantitative and qualitative
methods of data collection so as not to confine the results of the study to producing
a monolithic view of a faceless learner, and losing sight of individuals with their
psychological, social or linguistic features. Thereby, another objective was profiling
a learner characterized by high or low level of FLSE. The investigation was
undertaken in the hope of adding to a relatively small number of studies into L2
self-esteem which would have used the concept of domain-specific self as a basis
for their research (Csizer & Dörnyei, 2005; Yashima, Zenuk-Nishide, & Shimizu,
2004). To the best of the author’s knowledge, to date the issue has not received due
attention in the Polish educational context (Iwaniec, 2014).
The research has identified a number of important interactions of FLSE and
factors considered as meaningful for attainment in foreign language learning. As
Oyserman et al. (2006) state, it is what comes to our mind when we think of
ourselves, which has a profound effect on behavioural and academic outcomes—the
incentives, individual reasons, plans and scripts for behaviour, i.e. standards for
engaging in real action. There is sufficient research evidence to assert that
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-75283-9_5
142 5 Conclusions and Implications for the EFL Classroom
self-images influence behaviour (Bong & Skaalvik, 2003; Coopersmith, 1967;

Crocker & Wolfe, 2001). Thus, as it has been asserted in the preceding chapters,
what students feel about themselves will determine the way they deal with the
challenges of their learning and also their relationship with others who partake in
the experience. Aside from that, it seems to be worth reminding Stevick’s (1980)
claim here, that success in foreign language learning depends more on what hap-
pens inside and between the people in the classroom than on materials and tech-
niques. In other words, emotional factors can cancel out, to quite a remarkable
extent, the importance of modern language labs, glossy-cover course books, and the
latest methodological solutions.
Given the vital role of FLSE in learning and teaching processes, its sensitivity to
environmental influences, such as school and class affordances, and the rather
insufficient amount of academic interest in its translation into the Polish context, the
study attempted to exploit the niche, and, hopefully, advance the understanding of
the specificity of L2-learning by Polish learners. The primary goal was to undertake
a pioneering, extensive research that viewed the construct from a social, psycho-
logical and educational perspective. More specifically, the purpose of the study was
to explore the dynamic nature of FLSE and its interaction with other factors, such as
proficiency in L2, a range of demographic, educational or personal factors. The
prime objectives established at the stage of planning the investigation were:
ensuring its optimal breadth, depth and amount of detail (Dewaele, 2005). With
such assumptions in mind, the breadth was going to be accomplished by defining a
comparatively large number of relevant independent variables, explored quantita-
tively and qualitatively. The optimal depth and amount of detail were going to be
attained by using a relatively large sample, representative of three-level student
populations varying in terms of linguistic background and demographic features,
such as age, gender, place of residence, etc. The considerations of variety were
supposed to enhance the validity of the results. As the period of secondary and
tertiary education concurs with adolescent growth and maturation as well as at least
two school transitions, gaining insights into student specific self-esteem was con-
sidered as potentially informative. This in-depth study, its objectives and scope
were humbly hoped to contribute to understanding the importance of one of the
major affective factors in SLA in the Polish educational reality (and its notable
pedagogical implications) and, ultimately, broadening the theoretical and practical
horizons in the realm of instructed Second Language Acquisition.
According to the theoretical models that underlay the study, affect and cognition
operate in unison, so emotions can facilitate or impede cognitive processes
(Dewaele, 2011). Consequently, learners who feel good about themselves are more
likely to succeed in their educational striving because they may be expected to
exploit their maximum capacity to perform well (Bong & Skaalvik, 2003;
Coopersmith, 1967). High self esteem learners are also believed to set higher goals
for themselves, feel satisfaction from their progress and success, or be more
enduring if a temporary failure occurs. In the light of these claims, the author of the
book noticed the need to embark on a study that would scrutinize the relation
between learner FLSE and their proficiency in L2 across educational stages that are
5.1 The Purpose of the Book 143
regarded as inherently dynamic in the Polish education (and beyond).

L2-proficiency was considered in its manifold dimensions, i.e. as length, intensity
of exposure to L2 or two-way assessed achievement. The statistic analyses affirmed
that there is an interaction between the central construct and all of the facets of
proficiency.
Academic Psychology on a par with popular Psychology propound that low
self-esteem is the cause of all evil while high self-esteem is the cause of all good
(Manning, Bear, & Minke, 2006). Self-esteem, defined as a student’s overall
evaluation of him or herself (feelings of general happiness and satisfaction or
contrariwise) has been claimed to relate to student’s perceptions of competence or
adequacy in academic and nonacademic domains (Marsh & Craven, 2006),
including its foreign language learning facet (FLSE). Global self-esteem can pos-
sibly be mediated by domain-specific self-esteem (FLSE), while specific
self-esteem is likely to be related with academic achievement, rendered for example
as FL proficiency (Rosenberg, Schooler, Schoenbach, & Rosenberg 1995). It can be
concluded then, that enhancing FLSE should cause higher achievement, or vice
versa, and, indirectly, higher achievement may well improve global self-esteem.
These interrelations were considered as worth exploring due to their notable rele-
vance to EFL teaching practices. Therefore, the study posed a question whether
there was any relationship between learner global self-esteem and FLSE. The
statistic computations disclosed interdependence between the constructs.
In an attempt to make the study more broad-ranged, a sociodemographically
varied pool of participants was involved. The sample comprised lower and upper
secondary students as well as college students from cities, towns and villages. Their
identities were probed into in search of interactions between FLSE and gender,
place of residence, participation in extracurricular activities in English, etc. Both
demographic and educational variables were believed to correlate with the main
construct to some extent. For example, some of the existing researches have proved
that young males outdo females in global self-esteem (Kling et al., 1999; Sullivan,
2009). It remained to be investigated whether the same holds true about FLSE. The
students from urban areas were hypothesized to represent higher FLSE than their
rural peers due to easier access not only to facilities, like renowned language
schools, learning centres, but also more professional instructors or native English
speakers, etc. The results failed to show any significant interaction between FLSE
and gender, but fully corroborated the link between FLSE and residence. It was also
discovered that participation in extra activities and positive attitudes to the subject
and the instructor concur with the experience of increased confidence in L2, and so
does having close relatives who know English.
Having a vivid self-image is a foundation of any goal-oriented behaviour, for
instance motivated L2-learning. Students who regard themselves as good language
learners are far more likely to engage in language learning behaviours that lead to
progress (Iwaniec, 2014).
Dörnyei’s (2009) L2 Self System explicates the conceptual framework for the
role of self in the second language domain. The author propounds that ‘… possible
selves offer the most powerful, and at the same time the most versatile, motivational
self-mechanism, representing the individuals’ ideas of what they might become,

what they would like to become, and what they are afraid of becoming’ (2005,
p. 99). Due to the presumed link between L2-related self-views and motivated
learning, existing research argues for reciprocal causal relationship among
domain-specific self-esteem, academic interest, and achievement (Marsh & Craven,
2006). It appears that a domain-specific self esteem plays a crucial role in predicting
academic achievement, even more crucial than personality traits (MacIntyre,
Mackinnon, & Clement, 2009). In search of direct confirmation of the above
postulates in the context of Polish secondary and tertiary education, the current
study endeavored to investigate the linkage between the Ideal L2-Self of a learner
and their FLSE, and proved that the constructs were interlinked.
FLSE, as an affective factor purportedly works in concert with others repre-
senting the domain, such as foreign language anxiety or language learning beliefs.
The former factor has been proved to be a potent predictor of achievement (or
failure) in FL learning, especially speaking and writing (Horwitz, 1995;
Piechurska-Kuciel, 2008), the latter can have an impact on motivation, performance
in class or even cause anxiety). Yet another variable which has been indicated as a
predictor of language achievement (Lan & Oxford in Chiang & Villareal, 2013),
and hypothetically correlates with FLSE is the use of learning strategies. All things
considered, the presupposed relations between the factors may grease the wheels of
language learning but also slide into a vicious cycle of mutual adverse influences.
Due to lack of coherence in the area of applied linguistics on the relationship
between FLSE and the factors mentioned above, the current research was designed
towards shedding new light and unraveling some of the complex interactions. The
results were entirely consistent, which is to say that all of the factors selected for
detailed scrutiny were proved to interplay with the learner’s L2 self-esteem.
5.2 Recommendations for Further Research
Regarding the complex nature of FLSE and its interactions with the most vital
aspects of FL learning, there is extensive mileage in continuing the explorations. It
has been stressed throughout the current book that self-esteem both in its global and
specific dimension is subject to dynamic fluctuations over adolescence and the
onset of adulthood. The reported levels of FLSE revealed a notable decrease at the
upper secondary level. The data and the relevant literature indicate that FLSE is
under the influence of multiple variables, both internal and external to the learner.
Given the relative absence of studies with longitudinal designs, undertaking one
might be a promising direction, as generating data from the same participants over
their developmental changes and school transitions might help to capture more
consistent variation. Such investigations would provide an insight into
intra-individual and inter-individual changes in FLSE across time. However, the
technical challenges connected with the necessity to follow large numbers of
respondents along their diverse educational paths might act as a hard obstacle to the
5.2 Recommendations for Further Research 145
researcher. The educational transitions account for streaming students to different

classes, schools and cities, so communication with and access to the original sample
might become hardly feasible. It could also be interesting to study the dynamics of
FLSE in relation to factors that are likely to affect it at a particular point in time—
mood, fatigue, health issues, etc. Presumably, it is self-efficacy that would show
more effect exerted by such situational variables (Mercer, 2011). Still, collecting
data in varying contexts would help to measure the sensitivity of FLSE to tem-
porary influences and further advance the understanding of the construct.
Although the sample selected for the research has comprised the age range of
minimum six years (16–22 years of age), future research might try to expand it to
primary stages. However, the question of appropriate research instruments should
be addressed first, as the choice of one for younger age groups might pose some
challenge. This is due to the limited capacity of primary learners to think reflec-
tively and also their shorter experience with FL that might moderate their L2-related
self-views. For example, learning strategies, viewed as a correlate of FLSE, could
be less relevant to pupils who have had far less time to develop them. Given the
complexity of FLSE, researchers must be ready to think in innovative ways and
select optimal methods of investigation. At most times, multiple approaches seem
to be the best solution to provide a comprehensive view of the facet of the self. For
younger learners it would probably be appropriate to opt for interviews or direct
observations of behaviour. An interesting design was proposed by Mercer &
Williams (2014), i.e. they made attempts at making avail of participants’ imagi-
nation and asking them to draw images, later combined into collages that repre-
sented them as language learners and how they experienced language learning. It
might be worth considering methods of obtaining data in such a multimodal way
from pre-adolescent informants.
The role of significant others, as the findings of the study show, is a potent factor
in molding FLSE. The learner’s family background deserves thorough scrutiny as
the relationships at home may open a new perspective in understanding the ante-
cedents of specific (and global) self-esteem. It seems that the parent values,
ambitions and social standing might exert notable influence on the student’s attitude
to L2, their motivation, and level of self-confidence in learning. The same factors
are likely to affect parent-youth relationships, and indirectly impact academic
self-confidence. Outside of family relationships, the role of peers in enhancing or
hindering FLSE may be worth scrutinizing. Peer acceptance, in all probability, can
seriously increase self-esteem, while rejection can be devastating to its stability
(Matsunaga, 2011). Adolescent and young adult students spend a great amount of
time with peers both in school and after-school settings, and the interaction between
their self-related appraisals and their schoolmates’ or friends’ feedback is inevitable.
Teenage years and early twenties are the periods in development which are note-
worthy for the formation of values, beliefs and behaviours, and it is truly feasible
that a student’s FLSE is subjected to the influence of the social environment.
It could also be advantageous to address the question whether the standards and
norms for syllabi and exams may be relevant to L2 self-esteem. English has the
status of a global language that gives it a central role for a range of prestigious
careers, which make it one of the essential requirements (Mercer, 2011). Jobs in
technology, the world of science, tourism, etc. require day-to-day contact with the
language, which is bound to affect the goals of learning as well as standards of
expectations held by participants of FL courses, both in school and extracurricular
settings. The learner’s FLSE, and, most probably motivation (conceptualized as
Ideal L2-Self) may be prone to the influence of the status of the language and the
long-term leaning goals, which will vary between a learner who sees himself/herself
as a member of technical staff in aviation and one whose ambitions target at
managerial positions in multinational corporations. Their ultimate goals may range
from mere ‘communicativeness’ to native-like or ESP competence. It would be an
interesting avenue for future research to compare the level of L2 self-worth of
learners working towards aims defined more specifically than passing the
school-leaving or end-of-year exams. Besides, the standing of English accounts for
its early introduction in Polish schools, before any other foreign language.
Consequently, students who begin learning the languages at different stages of
mental and emotional development, reach different levels of proficiency by the time
they graduate. It might be worthwhile to conduct an insightful cross–language
comparison of levels of FLSE and explore how the constructs are impacted by the
age when learning starts and the different teaching approaches assumed by the
instructors.
The next recommendation refers to the universality (opposed to the locality) of
research findings. Due to the vivid interest in ELT, research into its varied aspects is
flourishing. There seems to be a need, though for more cross-cultural comparisons.
Cultural psychologists and sociologists agree that emotional frameworks may vary
depending on the cultural context (ibid). Cultural values determine behaviours in
multiple dimensions—for instance adherence to individualism or collectivism,
uncertainty avoidance, indulge vs restraint, etc. (Hofstede, 2001). As explicated in
Chap. 1, people who conceive more collectivistic values have a sense of self which
is more interconnected with other people than people from
individualistically-oriented backgrounds (Marcus & Kitayama, 1991). In the light
of such truths, it may be well worth investigating whether students with more
interdependent self-construct tend to derive their FLSE from different sources than
their independent counterparts.
Concerning the recommended research designs, in the future, it would be
worthwhile to combine a variety of them, so that different, broad perspectives on
FLSE are gained. As mentioned above, obtaining data by means of multimodal
methods might be an promising undertaking. It needs to be remembered, though,
that quantitative and qualitative data collection methods and triangulation that
would help capture different dimensions of the L2-related representations of the
self, and cross-validate the results are highly advisable (Piechurska-Kuciel, 2008).
The sense of self might not lend itself to be explored by experimental design due to
ethical considerations, therefore correlational or differential designs are the most
appropriate options. Whilst the instrument used in the research proved to be a
reliable tool, it remains to be explored whether it would lend itself to be exploited in
other research contexts, for example with informants who suffer from learning
5.2 Recommendations for Further Research 147
difficulties such as dyslexia, learning disabilities or minor mental distortions such as

a school phobia, etc.
As it was proposed in the preceding chapters, self-esteem is responsible for
various behavioural outcomes. It might be an interesting direction in research to
explore how learning behaviours and instincts are affected by the L2-related
self-regard that the learner holds her/himself in. Students with higher self-esteem
may well be more inclined to take an active part in their education than students
with lower self-esteem, which may be embodied by higher class participation,
cooperation in class organization, etc. Low self-esteem is often associated with
decreased motivation and poor grades, and, in the social perspective aggressive
behaviour or, broadly speaking, interpersonal problems of manifold nature. All of
the symptoms are relevant to EFL classrooms and individual accomplishment in
learning. Therefore more intensive research into the range of behaviours through
which L2-self-esteem issues are manifested could help plan and implement effective
interventions that might be used both as prevention and remedial measures, without
the necessity to turn to schools psychologists or pedagogy experts, whose avail-
ability cannot always be taken for granted, and whose therapeutic programmes will
need time and systematicity on the part of the expert and the learner. Contrarily, the
class teacher is the person who meets their students regularly, observes their
behaviour on a regular basis, and may be in the best position to undertake per-
sonalized, on the spot intervention before minor disturbances grow into serious
learning difficulties.
5.3 Implications for the EFL Classrooms
The findings from the study and the examination of the relevant literature allow for
specific implications for FL educators and learners. It is evident from the results
reported in the book that FLSE is complex in terms of its role and interrelations
with vital aspects of L2 learning. Beyond doubt, low FLSE can cause cognitive
deficits, such as impaired memory work, ineffective learning, and, consequently,
poor performance, usually leading to further deterioration of the self-image (see:
Chap. 1). The main goal of this section is to present some directions for practi-
tioners towards creating more supportive environment that would protect learners’
sound FLSE and enhance it when it is fragile. It would be naïve to believe that there
are easy, straightforward ways to achieve these aims, but it is feasible and highly
recommendable to take some measures towards providing students with more
security, fostering their positive attitude and motivation with an ultimate goal in
mind, i.e. making them more self-confident in foreign language learning.
First and foremost, pre-service and in-service teacher training should offer
modules, workshops or any other form of training to raise awareness of the
importance of learner self-esteem and other affective factors for attainment in L2.
Such training could contain a brief introduction to the etiology of low FLSE, its
consequences, ways of diagnosing the symptoms, and the most crucial section,
i.e. practical solutions for dealing with the problem. For instance, instructors should
be sensitized to symptoms such as excessive shyness, withdrawal, pace of speech
that puts some strain on the listener, avoiding aye contact, defensive behaviours,
etc. (Branden, 1995). Other features that might concur with learner self-esteem
issues are of demographic nature - their rural origin, or a deprived family back-
ground, which does not stimulate academic ambitions and where the knowledge of
foreign languages is not perceived as an important part of education. Fortunately,
the availability of electronic media and the access to the Internet may help to bridge
the gap of difference in the exposure to L2 between students in city and country
schools. Besides, partly due to the same factors, rural communities are believed to
be on the right way to come to realize the importance of solid education. Still,
according to the research findings, urban students enjoy markedly higher level of
FLSE. All in all, identifying the students with self-worth issues ought to be only
one aspect of teachers’ responsibility. When s/he has grown the awareness of which
students are potentially vulnerable to FLSE distortions, a plan of intervention may
be devised. The preventive (or remedial) steps may take the form of special
activities which are incorporated in lesson plans and serve the dual purpose of FL
practice and FLSE-boosting therapy. The following examples by Chaika (2012)
seem appropriate for both middle and higher education students. In the first one the
teacher divides the class into groups of four to six and asks the members of each
group to choose one person that they are supposed to compliment on behaviour,
positive traits of character or school performance. All the he positive features that
are accentuated are recorded by a group secretary and passed on to the person. The
list can be added to their learning journal or the class year book. Another practical
idea consists in asking the groups or individual students to write a short television
commercial highlighting his/her special qualities to a potential employer and pre-
senting the product in front of the whole class.
Equally important as identifying and supporting potential low FLSE holders is
building a positive rapport with the whole class. Warm and ingenuous relationships
with students are the prerequisites for their positive frame of mind that is conducive
to sound FLSE. Undoubtedly, a supportive instructor enables students to overcome
inhibitions that usually accompany a fragile sense of self-worth. It deserves to be
reminded that the current study proved a strong positive correlation between liking
the teacher and FLSE, which is a straightforward evidence for the importance of
making effort to build and consolidate a friendly teacher–student
relationship. Among other features, the FLSE-saving approach translates into
providing sufficient, positive feedback and restraining from humiliating remarks. It
also means motivating, complimenting students and using humour ‘for’ rather than
‘against’ them. Additionally, if the teacher manages to teach mutual respect in the
class community, the individual learners will feel secure and unthreatened by
criticism or ridicule. It needs to be remarked that a wise instructor does not restrain
themselves to an incessant flow of empty praising (which soon becomes valueless if
used excessively) but assesses the student fairly, indicating areas for improvement
and offering guidance towards it, generally focusing more on learning than per-
formance (Crocker et al., 2003). Students soon notice the difference between
5.3 Implications for the EFL Classrooms 149
genuine feedback and empty praise, so comments that express individualized,

thoughtful appreciation are far more worthy of notice. All things considered, tea-
cher dispositions and school climate play a tremendous role in the development of
the positive sense of self (Helm, 2007; Scott, 1999).
Another solution that may be proposed towards increasing both students’ global
and L2-self esteem is Social-Emotional Learning—an approach that promotes
social and emotional intelligence, and thereby self-regulated learning. It aims at
training students in pursuing their own educational goals and surmounting obsta-
cles. The goals may range from being able to communicate on a trip abroad to
passing an international C1-C2 level English examination. The difficulties may be
for instance non-motivating course books, inconvenient timing of the FL classes or
an occasional feeling of frustration with slow progress. An example of a practical
teaching idea that may help in accomplishing the goals is asking the students to
write themselves a letter at the beginning of a year or term. The letter might be
about their current interests, appearance, best friends, etc. It should also contain a
section on the important goals that they want to pursue by the next year. The letters
in sealed envelopes would be stored by the teacher and given back to the students
after a year (Chaika, 2012). In general, teacher guidance towards self-regulation
must consist in assisting students in organization of their learning, self-monitoring
and self-assessment. Self-regulated learners, who feel responsible for their out-
comes, whether better or worse, actively seek ways to succeed, and ultimately
improve their FLSE (Zimmerman, 2001).
The correlation between FLSE and proficiency found by the research provides
grounds for the claim that enhancing self-regard is worthwhile as it can be expected
to impact progress in L2. Low FLSE is related to poor performance and low
learning aspirations, both of them detrimental to the sense of achievement. On the
contrary, creating opportunities for learners to enjoy a sense of achievement,
making them aware of their expanding competence is bound to strengthen their
FLSE (Marsh & Martin, 2011). In practical terms, the measures taken by the teacher
may range from the choice of homework that inspires, varying the level of chal-
lenge of class and home assignments, (so that both higher and lower achievers stand
the chance of succeeding in them), to coursework selection and many others.
A highly recommendable teaching solution may be individualizing tasks at which
many students can be successful. Generally, it is crucial to get to know the learners
not as merely parts of a class monolith, but as its individual members, with their
unique profiles, which are jigsaws of strengths and weaknesses. Then, it will be far
easier to perform an accurate assessment of the student’s deficits and tailor tea-
cherly support for the student’s specific needs. It may prove beneficial to make
grades private, rather than public, or avoid grading schemes that allows only the
best (few) students achieve the highest marks. Such measures would reduce the
power of social comparisons that may be critical to students with less stable FLSE
(Manning et al., 2006). In the light of the findings, the variety in class must also
pertain to skills development. Students’ self-assessment of skills is related to their
FLSE, so an FLSE-sensitive course of L2 ought to contain balanced practice of all
the macro-skills and subskills. Such diversity is bound to accommodate learners
with varying performance in different skills. Creating opportunities for getting good
grades appears to be particularly beneficial in the light of relation between them and
learner self-esteem proved by the study. It also advisable to build on students’
strengths by encouraging individuals to share their unique knowledge obtained by
pursuing hobbies and special interests. Meanwhile, when failures occur, the
FLSE-saving solution is to let students understand that they are due to insufficient
effort rather than ability. It is likely to strengthen the persistence to overcome
problems and prevent the attitude of helplessness. The positive correlation between
proficiency represented by the length of exposure and FLSE implies that an early
start of L2 instruction is worthwhile in the perspective of developmental self-image
distortions that occur to adolescent learners (see: Chap. 1). The learning experience
being longer than six years (primary school English instruction), it may act as a
shield against the fluctuations of FLSE that may afflict a secondary school student.
It may be worth reminding here that the study proved that upper secondary students
indeed suffered from its lowered level. This finding is a clear indication for the need
to sensitize teachers to greater vulnerability of this age group, so that they do not
develop negative affect that might turn the forthcoming tertiary L2 learning into a
rather displeasing necessity that has to be endured. Equally important is the
intensity of exposure as extended courses tend to give learners more self-confidence
in L2.
Another important aspect of FLSE-promoting teaching is building and sustain-
ing learner motivation. Creating secure atmosphere or enhancing learner social
skills mentioned before is of critical importance in this respect, but there are also
other paths to success. It is worth finding a way to reach students and help them
form the right beliefs about learning. Beliefs on the practical value of different
sources of knowledge are likely to influence learning processes and the level of
satisfaction felt by the learner. The impact of “I can communicate with foreigners
pretty well” or “I’m sure English will be useful for my future job” may be dra-
matically different from “The English grammar is terribly complicated” or “English
is harder than any other subject.” In order to combat the dispiriting or cherish the
positive thoughts, a teacher could try a variety of ideas, such as directing the
students towards appropriate websites and other electronic resources (for example
podcasts), encourage them to find international penpals who share the same hob-
bies, watch undubbed films in English, or to reach for magazines or graded readers.
Circumstances permitting, it is advisable to encourage travel experiences, such as
international exchange programs or individual trips, as they naturally create
authentic (unrestrained by assessment) opportunities for practice, providing learners
with positive affective feedback (Mercer, 2011). It is most desirable to exploit any
practical solution that takes the learners beyond the conviction that there not much
more to learning than taking tests, getting grades and working towards the final
exams. Likewise, learners ought to be supported in shifting the emphasis from
competitive, externally-oriented comparisons to monitoring their own learning and
more internally-oriented comparisons (Mercer, 2011). Such attempts are bound to
have beneficial effects that will extrapolate beyond forming positive or negative
beliefs, for instance improve students’ decision making, critical thinking skills and
5.3 Implications for the EFL Classrooms 151
foster self-regulated learning. Conversely, ignoring students’ beliefs is likely to lead

to ineffective teaching and unsatisfactory learning outcomes (Anderson-Meger,
2014). All in all, it must be kept in mind that learning beliefs are predictors of high
or low FLSE.
Reaching the students’ learning beliefs may be also affected through learning
strategies, such as encouraging targeted class chat about optimal vocabulary tech-
niques, practising positive self-talk or activating background knowledge for tasks
that call for crossing subject borders. Generally, the instructor should decide in
accordance with the age, level and the specific needs of the students which
strategies are likely to guide them about how they should go about learning the
content and what skills will support robust learning. For secondary or tertiary
students it could be useful to practise self-explanation, which is explaining how
new information is related to known information, or explaining steps taken during
problem solving. Yet another interesting strategy is or imagery for text, which is
attempting to form mental images of text materials while reading or listening
(Dunlosky, 2013). High-achieving students “naturally” employ a large number of
different strategies in seeking, organizing, recording information, while their
lower-achieving peers may use fewer strategies or rely on the less effective ones
(Oxford, 2003). Therefore, class strategy training in aimed at upgrading the per-
formance of the latter seems to be a sensible solution, whose ultimate effects will
improve learning beliefs, and, by the same token, students’ FLSE. As
L2-self-esteem has been claimed to interplay with information processing (use of
learning strategies), the need to work on both factors seems to be unquestionable for
optimal language achievement (Mercer, 2011).
The FL teacher can also contribute to improving learner FLSE by helping them
control their language learning anxiety. It goes without saying that the atmosphere
in class, social skills, motivation, learning beliefs and the use of strategies, which
have been elaborated on above have a direct effect on anxiety. Other than that, the
instructor has got another tool at their disposal, which is referred to as cognitive
restructuring. The term denotes changing the meaning of an event by redefining its
importance if need occurs because “the way in which they construct their view of
reality through their evaluative beliefs and philosophies” (Ellis in
Piechurska-Kuciel, 2008, p. 250) is modifiable. It is one of the most effective
treatments for common problems related to anxiety disorders or bouts of depres-
sion, as it helps to understand unhappy feelings and moods and reframe the negative
thinking towards a more positive frame of mind. Resultantly, the automatic beliefs
that are responsible for the distorted thinking are cancelled out and replaced with
new thoughts, or the weight of the situation is put in the new perspective by taking a
more objective stance. In practice, it may mean redirecting a student’s
self-tantalizing thoughts like “I’ll never learn it” or “My writing skills are hopeless”
to “No panicking now. I’ll sit over it again tonight” or “There is still some time to
practise. I’m sure I’ll do better next time.” The teacher’s role here is tremendous as
s/he is the one who can identify excessively anxious (usually low-FLSE) students
and direct her/his reassuring efforts at them to beat their self-sabotage.
The results of the study and the literature of the subject demonstrate how
complex the psychological background to FLSE is, and how intricately the con-
struct is related to different factors that stem from variation across learners and
educational contexts. Moreover, the factors may impact the learner simultaneously,
and some of them mediate the effect of others (for instance learning beliefs may
mediate motivation and indirectly influence FLSE). According to the explications in
the preceding chapters, L2 self-esteem comes into being as a result of combination
of personal traits, processes, situations and events. Therefore, it would be unrea-
sonable to expect that it can be handily controlled and molded in universal ways.
There may not be fast-working solutions to improve its level, but it is definitely
worth trying to build unintimidating, secure atmosphere in class and take the low
FLSE students into special care that will evoke their sense of security, help them
endure in the face of perceived threats and add to their learning motivation. Every
learner is a unique blend of strengths and weaknesses, styles and preferences, and in
view of this simple, albeit weighty truth, instructors need to be sensitive to the
diversity, so that the best parts of the individual student’s potentials are fully
exploited for the common goal of optimal attainment in foreign language learning.
To date, there is rather little empirical research into the nature of FLSE despite
its recognized importance in FL learning. It is humbly hoped that the endeavours
made by the author of the current book are a little step towards broader under-
standing of its conglomerate nature and vital role in the process. The study rep-
resents an interdisciplinary approach; it is grounded in Second Language
Acquisition but borders on Psychology and, to a lesser extent, on other social
sciences. The broadened perspective was assumed in order to expand the insight
into the construct and to avoid sweeping generalizations or oversimplifications in
outlining it, interpreting its effects or formulating appropriate conclusions.
Appendix A
Interview with High and Low FLSE Students
L1 acquisition and early L2 learning

1. Did you learn to speak early/earlier than your siblings or peers? Are there any
family stories connected with your early speech development? Did you have to
meet with a speech therapist?
2. What are your earliest English language learning memories? Did you enjoy the
lessons? Why/why not?
Selected personality traits
3. Are you a quiet or talkative person? Does it matter how many people you have
to speak to? Is it similar in English?
4. Are you a popular person? Do you think you could call yourself an extrovert?
Mastery experiences and the role of significant people
5. Have you ever used English abroad? Could you tell me more about the
experience?
6. Do you remember feeling proud of your performance in English? For example,
when you communicated successfully or you performed a difficult task well? Do
you remember being complimented on your English?
7. Do you remember any unpleasant experience with English which made you feel
embarrassed or dissatisfied?
8. Do/es your teacher/s of English show appreciation for your achievements and
motivate you to study?
9. Is there anybody whose command of English inspires you and you would like
reach their level? Who is it?

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-75283-9
154 Appendix A
Self-selected extra language practice

10. Do you take every opportunity to practise and improve your English beyond
school/college?
Academic achievement
11. How do you assess yourself in your class/group? Are you one of the the top,
middle or lower achievers?
12. How does your performance in English compare with other subjects? Is it
better, more or less the same or worse?
13. What is your Grade Point Average?
Appendix B
Foreign Language Self-esteem Scale (Adapted from Liu, 2009)
1. I can follow the classes/lessons of English easily.

2. I am able to help my group/classmates in their English coursework.
3. English is one of the subjects I am good at.
4. I believe that if I work hard, I will be able to achieve the goals I set for myself.
5. I think most of my classmates are smarter than I am.
6. The teacher/s of English feel/s that I am poor at my work.
7. I get frightened when I am asked a question in an English lesson/class.
8. I perform better in English than most of my friends.
9. I often feel like giving up English.
10. I am usually interested in English lessons.
Global Self-esteem Scale (Rosenberg, 1965)

1. On the whole I am satisfied with myself.
2. At times I think I am no good at all.
3. I feel that I have a number of good qualities.
4. I am able to do things as well as most other people.
5. I feel I do not have much to be proud of.
6. I certainly feel useless at times.
7. I feel that I am a person of worth, at least the equal of others.
8. I wish I could have more respect for myself.
9. All in all, I am inclined to feel that I am a failure.
10. I take a positive attitude toward myself.

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-75283-9
156 Appendix B
Ideal L2—Self Scale (Taguchi, Magid & Papi, 2009)

1. I can imagine myself living abroad and having a discussion in English.
2. I can imagine a situation where I am speaking English with foreigners.
3. Whenever I think about my future career, I can imagine myself using English.
4. The things I want to do in the future require me to use English.
5. I can imagine myself writing e-mails/letters in English.
Learner Beliefs Scale (Zhou, 2011)

1. Some people are born with special abilities for languages.
2. You need to have a special gift for languages to learn it.
3. You need to have special capabilities to speak a foreign language well.
4. The English pronunciation is difficult.
5. There are too many English words to remember.
6. The English grammar is very complicated.
7. English is harder than other subjects.
8. You should not speak English before you learn correct pronunciation.
9. It is important to have pronunciation like a native speaker.
10. It is important to have very good pronunciation.
11. If someone spent an hour a day learning English, how much time would they
need to learn to speak?
Public Speaking Class Anxiety Scale (Yaikhong & Usaha, 2012)

1. I never feel quite sure of myself while I am speaking English.
2. I start to panic when I have to speak English without a preparation in advance.
3. In a speaking class, I can get so nervous I forget things I know.
4. I feel confident while I am speaking English.
5. I get nervous and confused when I am speaking English.
6. I am afraid that other students will laugh at me while I am speaking English.
7. I get nervous when the English teacher asks me to speak English which I have
prepared in advance.
8. I have no fear of speaking English.
9. I can feel my heart pounding when I am going to be called on.
10. I feel relaxed while I am speaking English.
11. It embarrasses me to volunteer to go out first to speak English
12. I face the prospect of speaking English with confidence.
13. Certain parts of my body feel very tense and rigid while I am speaking English.
14. I feel anxious while I am waiting to speak English.
Appendix B 157
15. I dislike using my voice and body expression while I am speaking English.
16. I have trouble to coordinate my movements while I am speaking English.
17. Even if I am very well prepared, I feel anxious about speaking English.
Learning Strategies Scale (Kavaliauskienė,

Anusienė & Kaunienė, 2011)
1. Review materials and prepare for classes.
2. Focus on a specific language point at a time.
3. Arrange the best learning environment.
4. Correction and identification of one’s errors.
5. Learn by listening, reluctant to talk.
6. Imitation of other people’s speech.
7. Use of dictionary or reference books.
8. Use of translation in learning.
9. Guess the meaning from context.
10. Ask for clarification of unknown words.
11. Active in pair work.
12. Active in group discussions.
13. Help others and their help in learning.
References
Adams, G. R., Ryan, B. A., Ketsetzis, M., & Keating, L. (2000). Rule compliance and peer
sociability: A study of family process, parent-child school-focused interactions and children’s
classroom behavior. Journal of Family Psychology, 14, 237–250.
Ahmed, W., & Bruinsma, M. (2006). A structural model of self-concept, autonomous
motivationand academic performance in cross-cultural perspective. Electronic Journal of
Research in Educational Psychology, 4(3), 551–576.
Akande, A. (2008). Comparing social behaviour across cultures and nations: The what and why
questions. Social Indicators Research, 92, 591–608.
Al-Hattab, A. A. M. (2006). Self-esteem and writing achievement in Saudi EFL students
insecondary schools. MA thesis, Taibah University, Faculty of Education and Humanities.
Department of Curricula and Instruction. Retrieved from: http://www.jarwan-center.com/
download/english_books/universitydissertations.
Al-Qaisy, L. M., & Turki, J. (2011). Adolescents’ creativity, self-concept and achievement
motivation. British Journal of Arts and Sciences, 2(2), 88–101.
Alves-Martins, M., Peixoto, F., Gouveia-Pereira, M., Amaral, V., & Pedro, I. (2002). Self-esteem
and academic achievement among adolescents. Educational Psychology, 22(1), 51–62.
Amato, P. R. (1986). Marital conflict, the parent-child relationship and child self-esteem. Family
Relations, 35(3), 403–410.
Anderson, J. (2002). Self-esteem: The myth of the century. Social psychology. Retrieved from
http://web.campbell.edu/faculty/asbury/sample_paper.pdf.
Araluce, H. A. (2002). Teaching English to blind and visually impaired young learners; The
affective factor. Doctoral thesis, Ediciones de La Universidad de Castilla La Mancha.
Arnold, J. (Ed.). (1999). Affect in language learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Arnold, J. (2007). Self-concept as part of the affective domain in language learning. In F. Rubio
(Ed.), Self-esteem and foreign language learning (pp. 13–27). Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars
Publishing.
Aryana, M. (2010). The relationship between self-esteem and academic achievement amongst
pre-university students. Journal of Applied Sciences, 10(20), 2474–2477.
Asadifard, A., & Biria, R. (2013). Affect and strategy use: The relationship between EFL learners’
self-esteem and language learning strategies. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 3(9),
1685–1690.
Avila, F. J. (2007). Self-esteem and second language learning: The essential colour in the palette.
In F. Rubio (Ed.), Self-esteem and foreign language learning (pp. 68–90). Newcastle:
Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
Bachman, J. G. (1970). Youth in transition: The impact of family background and intelligence on
tenth-grade boys. Ann Arbor, MI: Institute for Social Research.
Badran, H. (2001). The Relationship of Writing Apprehension and Self-Esteem to the Writing
Quality and Quantity of EFL University Students. ERIC Document Reproduction Service, ED
No 459 671.

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-75283-9
160 References
Branden, N. (1969). The psychology of self-esteem. San Fransisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Bagheri, M. S., & Faghih, M. (2012). The relationship between self-esteem, personality type and
reading comprehension of Iranian EFL students. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 2
(8), 1641–1650.
Baharudin, R., & Zulkefly, N. S. (2009). Relationships with father and mother, self-esteem and
academic achievement amongst college students. American Journal of Scientific Research, 6,
86–94.
Banaji, M. R., & Greenwald, A. G. (1995). Implicit gender stereotyping in judgements of frame.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68(2), 181–198.
Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: Freeman.
Baumeister, R. F. (2005). Self-concept, self-esteem and identity. In V. J. Derlega, B. Winstead, &
W. Jones (Eds.), Personality: Contemporary theory and research (3rd ed., pp. 246–280).
Belmont, CA: Thomson/Wadsworth, Virginia University.
Baumeister, R. F., Campbell, J. D., Krueger, J. L., & Vohs, K. D. (2003). Does high self-esteem
cause better performance, interpersonal success, happiness or healthier lifestyles?
Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 4, 1–44.
Baumeister, R., Tice, D., & Hutton, D. G. (1989). Self-presentational motivations and personality
differences in self-esteem. Journal of Personality, 57(3), 547–579.
Baumeister, R., & Vohs, K. (2007). Self-regulation, ego depletion and motivation. Social and
Personality Psychology Compass, 1(1), 115–128.
Benson, P. (2001). Teaching and researching autonomy in language learning. Harlow: Pearson
Education Limited.
Berg, B. L. (2012). Qualitative research methods for the social sciences (8th ed.). Boston, MA:
Allyn and Bacon.
Bernat, E., & Gvozdenko, I. (2005). Beliefs about language learning: Current knowledge,
pedagogical implications, and new research directions. Teaching English as a Second or
Foreign Language, 9(1), 1–21. Retrieved from http://tesl-ej.org/ej33/a1.pdf.
Bishop, J., & Inderbitzen, H. (1995). Peer acceptance and friendship: An investigation. Journal of
Early Adolescence, 15, 476–489. https://doi.org/10.1177/027243169501500400.
Blascovich, J., & Tomaka, J. (1991). Measures of self-esteem. In J. P. Robinson & P. R. Shaver
(Eds.), Measures of personality and social psychological attitudes (pp. 115–160). San Diego,
CA: Academic Press.
Bogdan, E. (2011). The relationship between situational self-esteem and residential location in
foreign language learning among junior high school learners. An unpublished Master’s
Thesis. Opole: Uniwersytet Opolski/Wydział Filologiczny.
Bong, M., & Skaalvik, E. M. (2003). Academic self-concept and self-efficacy: How different are
they really? Educational Psychology Review, 15(1), 1–40.
Bosse, T., Jonker, C., & Treur, J. (2008). Formalisation of Damasio’s theory of emotion, feeling
and core consciousness. Consciousness and Cognition, 17(1), 94–113.
Bown, J., & White, C. J. (2010). Affect in a self-regulatory framework for language learning.
System, 38, 432–443.
Božinović, N., & Sindik, J. (2011). Gender difference in the use of learning strategies in adult
foreign language learners. Metodički obzori 6(1), 5–21. UDK: 371.3:811:316.62-055.1/2.
Bradley, B., De Fife, J. A., Guarnaccia, C., Phifer, J., Fani, N., Ressler, K. J., & Westen, D. (2011).
Emotion dysregulation and negative affect: Association with psychiatric symptoms. Journal of
Clinical Psychiatry, 72, 685–691.
Branden, N. (1995). Six pillars of self-esteem. New York: Random House Publishing Group.
Branden, N. (2001). The psychology of self-esteem. San Francisco: Wiley.
Brown, H. D. (1994). Teaching by principles: An interactive approach to language pedagogy.
Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall Regents.
Brown, H. D. (2007). Principles of language learning and teaching (4th ed.). London: Longman.
Brown, J. D., & Marshall, M. A. (2006). The three faces of self-esteem. In M. Kernis (Ed.),
Self-esteem: Issues and answers (pp. 4–9). New York: Psychology Press.
References 161
Budd, A., Buschman, C., & Esch, L. (2009). The correlation of self-esteem and perceived social
support. Undergraduate Research Journal for the Human Science, 8. Retrieved from http://
www.kon.org/urc/v8/budd.html.
Buhrmerster, D., Furman, W., Wittenberg, M. T., & Reiss, H. T. (1988). Five domains of
interpersonal competence in interpersonal relationships. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 55, 991–1008.
Bushman, B., & Baumeister, R. (1998). Threatened egotism, narcissism, self-esteem, and direct
and displaced aggression: Does self-love or self-hate lead to violence? Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, 75, 219–229.
Byrne, B. (1986). Self-concept/academic achievement relations: An investigation of imensionality,
stability, and causality. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science/Revue canadienne des
sciences du comportement, 18(2), 173–186.
Byrne, B. M. (2002). Validating the measurement and structure of self-concept: Snapshots of past,
present, and future research. American Psychologist, 57, 897–909.
Caspi, A., Roberts, B. W., & Shiner, R. L. (2005). Personality development: Stability and change.
Annual Review of Psychology, 56, 453–484.
Chan, W. M., Chin, K. N., & Suthivan, T. (2011). Foreign language teaching in Asia and beyond:
current perspectives and future directions. Boston: Walter de Gruyter, Inc.
Chen, S.-K., Yeh, Y. C., Hwang, F.-M., & Lin, S. S. J. (2013). The relatonship between academic
self-concept and achievement: A multi-cohort—Multioccassion study. Learning and Individual
Difference, 23, 172–178.
Chiang, Y., & Villareal, D. S. (2013). Foreign language learning strategies and consecutive
interpreting achievement: An exploratory study on taiwanese interpreting students. Meta:
Journal des traducteurs/Meta: Translators’ Journal, 58(1), 146–164.
Cole, D. A., Maxwell, S. E., Martin, J. M., Peeke, L. G., Seroczynski, A. D., Tram, J. M., &
Maschman, T. (2001). The development of multiple domains of child and adolescent
self-concept: A cohort sequential longitudinal design. Child Development, 72, 1723–1746.
Coopersmith, S. (1967). The antecedents of self-esteem. San Francisco and London: Freeman &
Company.
Crocker, J., & Lawrence, J. S. (1999). Social stigma and self-esteem: The role of contingencies of
worth. In D. A. Prentice & D. T. Miller (Eds.), Cultural divides: Understanding and
overcoming group conflict (pp. 364–392). New York: Russell Sage.
Crocker, J., Luhtanen, R. K., Cooper, M. L., & Bouvrette, A. (2003). Contingencies of self-worth
in college students: Theory and measurement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
85, 894–908.
Crocker, J., & Nuer, N. (2003). The insatiable quest for self-worth: Comment. Psychological
Inquiry, 14(1), 31–34.
Crocker, J., & Wolfe, C. T. (2001). Contingencies of self-worth. Psychological Review, 108(3),
593–623.
Crozier, R. (1997). Individual learners. London, New York: Routledge.
Cubukcu, F. (2009). Learner autonomy, self-regulation and metacognition. International
Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 2(1), 1–12.
Csizer, K., & Dornyei, Z. (2005). The internal structure of language learning motivation and its
relationship with language choice and learning effort. Modern Language Journal 89(1), 19–36.
Dąbrowska, E. (2012). Different speakers, different grammars: Individual differences in native
language attainment. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, 2(3), 219–253.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1995). Human autonomy: The basis for true self-esteem. In M. Kernis
(Ed.), Efficacy, agency, and self-esteem (pp. 31–49). New York: Plenum Publishing Co.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2003). On assimilating identities to the self: A self-determination
theory perspective on internalization and integrity within cultures. In M. R. Leary &
J. P. Tangney (Eds.), Handbook on self and identity (pp. 253–274). New York: The Guilford
Press.
162 References
Dewaele, J. M. (2005). Investigating the psychological and emotional dimensions in instructed

language learning: Obstacles and possibilities. The Modern Language Journal, 89(3), 367–
380.
Dewaele, J. M. (2011). Reflections on the emotional and psychological aspects of foreign language
learning and use Anglistik. International Journal of English Studies, 22(1), 46–61.
Donellan, M. B., Trzesniewski, K. H., Robins, R. W., Moffit, T. E., & Kaspi, A. (2005). Low
self-esteem is related to aggression, anti-social behaviour and delinquency. Psychological
Science, 16(4), 328–336.
Dörnyei, Z. (1998). Motivation in second and foreign language learning. Language Teaching, 31,
117–135.
Dörnyei, Z. (2009). The psychology of second language acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
Du, M. (2012). A study of the relationship between English self-concept and language learning
strategies. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 3(3), 508–517.
Dulay, H., Burt, M., & Krashen, S. (1986). The natural approach. United Kingdom: Bloodaxe
Books Ltd.
Dunlosky, J. (2013). Strengthening the student toolbox: Study strategies to boost learning.
American Educator, 37, 12–21.
Eagly, A. H. (1967). Involvement as a determinant of response to favourable and unfavourable
information. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 7(3), 1–15.
Eccles, J. S., Wigfield, A., Flanagan, C. A., Miller, C., Reuman, D. A., & Yee, D. (1989).
Self-concepts, domain values, and self-esteem: Relations and changes at early adolescence.
Journal of Personality, 57(2), 283–310.
Elias, S. M. (2013). Deviant and criminal behaviour in the workplace. New York: NYU Press.
Emler, N. (2001). Self-esteem: The costs and causes of low self-worth. New York: Joseph
Rowntree Foundation.
Epstein, S. (1979). The ecological study of emotions in humans. In K. Blankstein (Ed.), Advances
in the study of communications and affect (pp. 47–83). New York: Springer.
Epstein, S. (1985). The implications of cognitive-experiential self-theory for research in social
psychology and personality. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviours, 15(3), 283–310.
Erol, Y. E., & Orth, U. (2011). Self-esteem development from age 14 to 30 years: A longitudinal
study. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101(3), 607–619.
Esmaeili, N. S., & Yaacob, S. N. (2012). Correlates of self-esteem among adolescents of divorced
families. Archives Des Sciences, 65(8), 52–59.
Faber, G. (2012). Gender and achievement differences in secondary students’ verbal self-concepts:
A closer look beyond bivariate comparison. Electronic journal of Research in Educational
Psychology, 11(3), 665–692.
Ferkany, M. (2008). The educational importance of self-esteem. Journal of Philosophy of
Education, 42(1), 120–134.
Fila-Jankowska, A. (2009). Samoocena autentyczna. Warszawa: SWPS Academica.
Fitts, W. H., & Roid, G. H. (1988). Tennessee self-concept scale (TSCS): Revised manual. Los
Angeles, CA: Western Psychological Services.
Fleming, J. S., & Courtney, B. E. (1984). The dimensionality of self-esteem II: Hierarchical facet
model for revised measurement scales. Journal of Personality and Social psychology, 46, 404–
421.
Fontana, D. (Ed.). (1981). Psychology for teachers. London: Macmillan, British Psychological
Society.
Fontana, D. (1991). Psychology for teachers. Leicester: The British Psychological Society in
Association with Macmillan Publishers.
De Fraine B., Van Damme, J., & Onghena, P. (2007). A longitudinal analysis of gender differences
in academic self-concept and language achievement: A multivariate multilevel latent growth
approach. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 32(1), 132–150. Retrieved from http://
www.elsevier.com.
References 163
Frank. M. (2011). The pillars of the self-concept: Self-esteem and self-efficacy. Retrieved from:
http//www.excelatlife.com/articles/selfesteem.htm.
Furmańska, E. (2001). Samoocena i samoakceptacja we wczesnej adolescencji. Edukacja i dialog,
(1), 24–29.
Cheung, T. S. (1986). Sex differences in the effects of academic achievement on self-esteem:
A Hong Kong case. Social Behaviour and Personality, 14(2), 161–166.
Gabillon, Z. (2005). L2 learner’s beliefs: An overview. Journal of Language and learning, 3(2),
233–260.
Galambos, N. L., Barker, E. T., & Krahn, H. J. (2006). Depression, self-esteem and anger in
emerging adulthood: Seven-year trajectories. Developmental Psychology, 42(2), 350–365.
Galinha, I., & Pais-Ribeiro, J. (2008). Structure and stability of subjective well-being: A structure
equation modeling analysis. Applied Research in Quality of Life, 3, 293–314.
Garret, P., & Young, R. (2009). Theorizing affect in foreign language learning: An analysis of one
learner’s responses to a communicative-based Portuguese course. The Modern Language
Journal, 93, 209–226.
Genesee, F. (1981). A comparison of early and late second language learning. Canadian Journal
of Behavioural Science / Revue canadienne des sciences du comportement, 13(2), 115–128.
Gentile, B., Grabe, S., Dolan-Pascoe, B., Twenge, J. M., Wells, B. E., & Maitino, A. (2009).
Gender differences in domain-specific self-esteem: A meta-analysis. Review of General
Psychology, 13(1), 34–45.
Goldsmith, H. H., Buss, K. A., & Lemery, K. S. (1997). Toddler and childhood temperament:
Expanded content, stronger genetic evidence, new evidence for the importance of environment.
Developmental Psychology, 33, 891–905.
Goldsmith, R. E., & Matherly, T. A. (1988). Creativity and self-esteem: A multiple operational-
ization validity study. Journal of Psychology, 122, 47–50.
Gore, J. S., & Cross, S. E. (2011). Defining and measuring self-concept change. Psychological
Studies, 56(1), 136–141.
Gray-Little, B., & Hafdahl, A. R. (2000). Factors influencing racial comparisons of self esteem:
A quantitative review. Psychological Bulletin, 126, 26–54.
Graziano, A. M., & Raulin, M. (2012). Research methods: A process of inquiry (8th ed.). London:
Pearson.
Greenwald, A. G., McGhee, D. E., & Schwartz, J. (1998). Measuring individual differences in
implicit cognition: The implicit association test. Journal of Counselling and Social Psychology,
74, 1464–1480.
Guindon, M. H. (2002). Toward accountability in the use of the self-esteem construct. Journal of
Counseling and Development, 80, 204–214.
Harper, J. F., & Marshall, E. (1991). Adolescents problems and their relationship to self-esteem.
Journal of Adolescence, 55(4), 64–70.
Harter, S. (1993). Causes and consequences of low self-esteem in children and adolescents.
In R. F. Baumeister (Ed.), Self-esteem: The puzzle of low self-regard (pp. 87–116). New York:
Plenum Press.
Harter, S. (1999). The construction of self: A developmental perspective. New York: Guilford.
Hashemian, M. (2012). On the interplay of self-esteem, proficiency level and language learning
strategies among Iranian L2 learners. International Journal of Foreign Language Teaching and
Research, 1(1), 1–10.
Hassan, B. (2001). The relationship of writing apprehension and self-esteem to the writing quality
and quantity of EFL University students. Mansoura Faculty of Education Journal, 39, 1–36.
Hayati, A. M., & Ostadian, M. (2008). The relationship between self-esteem and listening
comprehension of EFL students. Published Research, Faculty of Letters and Humanities. Iran:
Shahid Chamran University of Ahvaz.
Heatherton, T. F., & Polivy, J. (1991). Development and validation of a scale for measuring state
self-esteem. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 6(6), 895–910.
164 References
Heatherton, T. F., & Wyland, C. (2003). Assessing self-esteem. In S. Lopez & R. Snyder (Eds.),
Assessing positive psychology (pp. 219–233). Washington, DC: APA.
Helm, C. (2007). Teacher dispositions affecting self-esteem and student performance. Clearing
House, 80(3), 109–110.
Hernandez, J. L. (1999). Conformity and self-esteem: Possible correlation? National
Undergraduate Research Clearinghouse, 2. Retrieved from http://www.webclearinghouse.
net/volume/.
Hoare, P. N., & Machin, M. A. (2010). The impact of reemployment on access to the latent and
manifest benefits of employment and mental health. Journal of Occupational and
Organizational Psychology, 83, 759–770.
Hobza, C. L., Walker, K. E., Yakushko, O., & Peugh, J. L. (2007). What about men? Social
comparison and the effects of media images on body and self-esteem. Psychology of Men and
Masculinity, 8, 161–172.
Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture’s consequences: Comparing values, behaviors, institutions, and
organizations across nations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Hoge, D. R., Smit, E. K., & Hanson, S. L. (1990). School experiences predicting changes in
self-esteem of sixth and seventh grade students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 117–127.
Hood, P., & Tobutt, K. (2009). What is the background to primary language learning? In Modern
languages in the primary school (pp. 1–15). London: SAGE Publications Ltd. https://doi.org/
10.4135/9781446269466.n1.
Horney, K. (1950). Neurosis and human growth. New York: W. W. Norton.
Horwitz, E. (1995). Student affective reactions and the teaching and learning of foreign languages.
International Journal of Educational Research, 23(7), 573–579.
Horwitz, E. (2008). Becoming a language teacher: A practical guide to second language learning
and teaching. Newton: Allyn & Bacon.
Hu, J., Yang, Y., Wang, D., & Liu, Y. (2008). Contingency as a moderator of the effect of domain
self-esteem on global self-esteem. Social Behavior and Personality, 36(6), 851–864.
Hunt, A. L. (2011). Girls gone wild: Improving a self-esteem program for adolescent girls through
participant input. Retrieved from http://udini.proquest.com/view/girls-gone-wild-improving-a-
self-pqid:2308424601/.
Iwaniec, J. (2014). Self-constructs in language learning: what is their role in self-regulation?
In K. Csizer & M. Magid (Eds.), The impact of self-concept on language learning (pp. 189–205).
James, W. (1890). The principles of psychology. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Janis, I. L., & Field, P. B. (1959). Sex differences and factors related to persuasibility.
In C. I. Hovland & I. L. Janis (Eds.), Personality and persuasibility (pp. 55–68). New Haven,
CT: Yale University Press.
Kartal, E. (2011). Foreign language teacher trainees’ reading attitudes. Social Behavior and
Personality, 39(3), 345–360. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.2224/sbp.2011.39.3.345.
Kavaliauskienė, G., Kaminskienė, L., & Anusienė, L. (2007). Reflective practice: assessment of
assignments in English for Specific Purposes. Journal of the European Association of
languages for Specific Purposes, 14, 149–166.
Kernis, M. (2003). Toward a conceptualization of optimal self-esteem. Psychological Enquiry, 14,
1–26.
Kernis, M. (Ed.). (2013). Self-esteem issues and answers. A sourcebook of current perspectives:
Psychology Press.
Kernis, M., Brown, A. C., & Brody, G. H. (2000). Fragile self-esteem in children and its
associations with perceived patterns of parent-child communication. Journal of Personality, 68
(2), 225–252.
Kling, C., Hyde, J. S., Showers, C. J., & Buswell, B. N. (1999). Gender differences in self-esteem:
A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 125(4), 470–500.
Knox, M., Funk, J., Elliott, R., & Bush, E. G. (1998). Adolescents’ possible selves and their
relationship to global self-esteem. Sex Roles, 39, 61–80.
Kohn, A. (1994). The truth about self-esteem. Phi Delta Kappa, 76, 272–283.
References 165
Koosha, B., Ketabi, S., & Kassaian, Z. (2011). The effects of self-esteem, age and gender on the
speaking skills of intermediate university EFL learners. Theory and Practice in Language
Studies, 1(10), 1328–1337.
Kort-Butler, L. A., & Hageven, L. J. (2011). School-based extracurricular activity involvement and
adolescent self-esteem: A growth-curve analysis. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 1(1),
1–15.
Kostić-Bobanović, M., & Ambrosi-Randić, N. (2008). Strategije učenja engleskoga kao stranog
jezika na različitim obrazovnim stupnjevima [Language learning strategies in different English
as a foreign language education levels]. Društvena istraživanja, 17(1–2), 281–303.
Krashen, S. D. (1982). Principles and practice in second language acquisition. Oxford: Pergamon.
Kugle, C. L., Clements, R. O., & Powell, P. M. (1983). Level and stability of self-esteem in
relation to academic behavior of second graders. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
44(1), 201–209.
Kwan, V. S. Y., Kuang, L. L., & Hui, N. (2009). Identifying the sources of self-esteem: The
mixed, medley of benevolence, virtue and bias. Self and Identity, 8, 176–195.
Lau, I., Yeung, A. S., Jin, P., & Low, R. (1999). Toward a hierarchical, multidimensional English
self-concept. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 747–755.
Lawrence, D. (2006). Enhancing self-esteem in the classroom (3rd ed.). London: Paul Chapman
Publishing.
Leary, M. R. (1999). Making sense of self-esteem. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 8,
32–35.
LePine, J. A., & Van Dyne, L. (1998). Predicting voice behavior in work groups. Journal of
Applied Psychology, 83(6), 852–868.
Lim, L. L., & Chang, W. C. (2009). Role of collective self-esteem on youth violence in a collective
culture. International Journal of Psychology, 44, 71–78.
Liu, H. (2008). The relationship between EFL students’ academic self-concept and language
performance. Feng Chia Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, 17, 165–184.
Liu, H. (2009). Exploring changes in academic self-concept in ability grouped English classes.
Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, 2(2), 411–432.
Liu, H., & Chang, C. (2013). The study on language learning strategy use and its relation to
academic self-concept: The case of EFL students in Taiwan. Journal of Language Teaching
and Research, 49(2), 260–268.
Liu, Y., Fu, Q. F., & Fu, X. L. (2009). The interaction between cognition and emotion. Chinese
Science Bulletin, 54(22), 4102–4116.
Liu, W. C., & Wang, C. K. J. (2005). Academic Self-Concept: A Cross-Sectional Study of Grade
and Gender Differences in a Singapore Secondary School. Asia Pacific Education Review, 6(1),
20–27.
Lobel, T. E., & Levanon, I. (1988). Self-esteem, need for approval, and cheating behavior in
children. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80(1), 122–123.
Lyons, D. (2014). The L2 self-concept in second language learning motivation: A longitudinal
study of Korean university students. In K. Csizer & M. Magid (Eds.), The impact of
self-concept on language learning (pp. 108–130). Bristol, Buffalo, Toronto: Multilingual
Matters.
Lyubomirsky, S., King, L., & Diener, E. (2005). The benefits of frequent positive affect: Does
happiness lead to success? Psychological Bulletin, 131, 803–855.
MacDonald, G., Saltzman, J. L., & Leary, M. R. (2005). Social approval and trait self-esteem.
Journal of Research in Personality, 37(2), 23–40.
MacIntyre, P. D., Mackinnon, S. P., & Clément, R. (2009). The development of a scale to assess
possible selves as a source of language learning motivation. In Z. Dörnyei & E. Ushioda (Eds.),
Motivation, language identity and the L2 self (pp. 193–214). North York, ON: Multilingual
Matters.
166 References
Maftoon, P., Sabah, S. (2012). A critical look at the status of affect in second language acquisition
research: Lessons from Vygotsky’s legacy. Retrieved from http://content.ebscohost.com/
pdf29_30/pdf2012/B9WN/01May12.
Maner, J. K., & Park, L. E. (2009). Does self-threat promote social connection? The role of
self-esteem and contingencies of self-worth. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96,
203–217.
Manning, M., Bear, G., & Minke, K. (2006). Self-concept and self-esteem. Children’s needs III:
Development, prevention, and intervention (pp. 341–356). Bethesda: NASP Publications.
Manzanaresis, M. A. R., & Murphy, E. (2010). The language learning beliefs of self-identified,
successful learners of Spanish as a foreign language. Canadian and International Education,
39(2), 75–89.
Marcus, H. R., & Kitayama, S. (1991). Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion
and motivation. Psychological Review, 98(2), 224–253.
Marjoribanks, K., & Mboya, M. M. (2001). Age and gender differences in the self-concept of
South African students. Journal of Social Psychology, 141(1), 148–150.
Marsh, H. W. (1989). Age and sex effects in multiple dimensions of self-concept: Pre-adolescence
to early adulthood. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81, 417–430.
Marsh, H. W. (1992). Content specificity of relations between academic achievement and
academic self-concept. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84(1), 35–42.
Marsh, H. W., & Ayotte, V. (2003). Do multiple dimensions of self-concept become more
differentiated with age? The differential distinctiveness hypothesis. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 95(4), 687–706.
Marsh, H. W., Byrne, B. M., & Shavelson, R. (1988). A multifaceted academic self-concept: Its
hierarchical structure and its relation to academic achievement. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 80(3), 366–380.
Marsh, H. W., Byrne, B., & Yeung, A. S. (1999). Causal ordering of academic self-concept and
achievement. Educational Psychologist, 34, 155–167.
Marsh, H. W., & Craven, R. G. (2006). Reciprocal effects of self-concept and performance from a
multidimensional perspective: Beyond seductive pleasure and undimensional perspectives.
Perspectives on Psychological Science, 1(2), 133–163.
Marsh, H. W., & Martin, A. J. (2011). Academic self-concept and academic achievement:
Relations and causal ordering. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 81(1), 59–77.
Marsh, H. W., & Shavelson, R. (1985). Self-concept: Its multifaceted, hierarchical structure.
Educational Psychologist, 20(30), 107–123.
Marsh, H. W., & Yeung, A. S. (1998). Longitudinal structural equation models of academic
self-concept and achievement: Gender differences in the development of math and English
constructs. American Education Research Journal, 35(4), 705–738.
Maruyama, G. M., Rubin, R. A., & Kingsbury, G. G. (1981). Self-esteem and educational
achievement: Independent constructs with a common cause? Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 40(5), 962–975.
Matsunaga, M. (2011). Underlying circuits of social support for bullied victims: An appraisal
based perspective on supportive communication and post-bullying adjustment. Human
Communication Research, 37(2), 174–206.
McCroskey, J. C. (1978). Validity of the PRCA as an index of oral communication apprehension.
Communication Monographs, 45, 192–203.
McCroskey, J. C. (1982). An introduction to rhetorical communication (4th ed.). Englewood
Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
McElwain, N. L., Booth-LaForce, C., Lansford, J., Wu, X., & Dyer, W. J. (2008). A process model
of attachment-friend linkages: Hostile attribution biases, language ability, and mother-child
affective mutuality as intervening mechanisms. Child Development, 79, 1891–1906.
McInerney, D. M., Cheng, R. W. Y., Mok, M. C., Kwok, M., & Lam, M. (2012). Academic
self-concept and learning strategies: Direction of effect on student academic achievement.
Journal of Advanced Academics, 23(3), 249–269.
References 167
Mercer, S. (2011). Towards an understanding of language learner self-concept. Heidelberg,

London, New York: Springer.
Mercer, S., & Williams, M. (Eds.). (2014). Multiple perspectives on the self in SLA. Bristol:
Multilingual Matters.
Mills, N. (2013). Self-efficacy in SLA. In S. Mercer & M. Williams (Eds.), Multiple perspectives
on the self in SLA (pp. 6–19). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Mills, N., Pajares, F., & Herron, C. (2007). Self-esteem of college intermediate French students:
Relation to achievement and motivation. Language Learning, 57(3), 417–442. Retrieved from
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2007.00421.x.
Morrison, T. L., Thomas, M. D., & Weaver, S. J. (1973). Self-esteem and self-estimates of
academic performance. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 41(3), 412–415.
https://doi.org/10.1037/h0035337.
Mruk, C. (1999). Self-esteem: Research, theory and practice (2nd ed.). London: Free Association
Books.
Mruk, C. (2006). Self-esteem research, theory and practice. New York: Springer.
Muller, J., Hicks, R. E., & Wincour, S. (1993). The effects of employment and unemployment on
psychological well-being in Australian clerical workers: Gender differences. Australian
Journal of Psychology, 45, 103–108.
Naouel, B. (2015). The role of foreign language learners’ self-esteem in enhancing their oral
performance. Express, an International Journal of Multi-Disciplinary Research, 2(2), 1–12.
Neighbors, C., Larimar, M. E., Geisner, I. M., & Knee, C. R. (2004). Feeling controlled and
drinking motives among college students: Contingent self-esteem as a mediator. Self and
Identity, 3, 207–224.
Neiss, M., Stevenson, C., & Sedikides, J. (2006). Self-esteem: A behavioural genetic perspective.
European Journal of Personality, 16, 351–367.
Ni, H. (2012). The effects of affective factors in SLA and pedagogical implications. Theory and
Practice in Language Studies, 2(7), 1508–1513.
Niki Maleki, M., & Mohammadi, A. M. (2009). Self-esteem and anxiety of Iranian EFL learners in
oral communication tasks. Journal of Linguistic Studies, 2(2), 47–54.
Nogueras, C. R. H. (1996). Self-esteem and oral language communicative proficiency in the
Puerto Rican learning-teaching process. An abridgement of a doctoral thesis, InterAmerican
University of Puerto Rico.
Nunan, D. (2000). Language teaching methodology (2nd impression). Pearson Education Ltd:
Harlow.
O’Malley, P., & Bachman, J. G. (1979). Self-esteem and education: Sex and cohort comparisons
among high school seniors. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 17, 1153–1159.
Okoko‚ W. O. (2012). Self-esteem and academic performance of students in public secondary
schools in Ndhiwa Distrist, Kenya. A research project report submitted in partial fulfillment of
the requirement for Master of education degree in the Department of Education Foundations‚
University of Nairobi.
Olmsted, M. P., Davis, R., Garner, D. M., & Eagle, M. (1991). Efficacy of a brief group
psychoeducational intervention for bulimia nervosa behaviour. Research and Therapy, 29(3),
305.
O'Malley, J. M., & Chamot, A. U. (1990). Learning strategies in second language acquisition.
New York: Cambridge University Press.
Ortega, A. (2007). Anxiety and self-esteem. In F. Rubio (Ed.), Self-esteem and foreign language
learning (pp. 105–127). Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
Orth, U., Robins, R. W., & Meier, L. L. (2009). Disentangling the effects of low self-esteem and
stressful events on depression: Findings from three longitudinal studies. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, 97(2), 307–321.
Orth, U., Robins, R. W., & Widaman, K. F. (2011). Life-span development of self-esteem and its
effects on important life outcomes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, (26). https://
doi.org/10.1037/a0025558.
168 References
Orth, U., Trzesniewski, K. H., & Robins, R. W. (2010). Self-esteem development from young
adulthood to old age: A cohort-sequential longitudinal study. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 98(4), 645–659.
Osborne, J. W., & Jones, B. (2011). Identification with academics and motivation to achieve in
school: How the structure of the self-influences academic outcomes. Educational Psychology
Review, 23, 131–158.
Oxford, L. R. (1990). Language learning strategies: What every teacher should know. Boston:
Heinle and Heinle Publishers.
Oxford, R. L. (2003). Language learning styles and strategies: An overview (pp. 1–25). GALA:
Learning Styles & Strategies/Oxford.
Oyserman, D., Bybee, D., & Terry, K. (2006). Possible selves and academic outcomes: How and
when possible selves impel action. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91(1),
188–204.
Pajares, R., & Schunk, D. H. (2001). Self-beliefs and school succes: Self-efficacy, self-concept,
and school achievement. In R. Riding & S. Rayner (Eds.), Self-perception (pp. 239–266).
London: Ablex Publishing.
Pavlenko, A. (2005). Emotions and multilingualism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Payne, T. W., & Schnapp, M. A. (2014). The relationship between negative affect and reported
cognitive failures. Depression Research and Treatment, 2014, 1–7.
Peixoto, F., & Almeida, L. S. (2010). Self-concept, self-esteem and academic achievement:
Strategies for maintaining self-esteem in students experiencing academic failure. European
Journal of Psychology of Education, 25, 157–175. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-010-0011-z.
Pelham, B. W., & Swan, W. B., Jr. (1989). From self-conception to self-worth: The sources and
structure of self-esteem. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 672–680.
Pepi, A., Faria, L., & Alesi, M. (2006). Personal conceptions of intelligence, self-esteem, and
school achievement in Italia and Portuguese students. Adolescence, 1(164), 615–631.
Peter-Szarka, S. (2012). Changes in and the relationship between language learning motivation and
self-concept in 11–14 year-old students in Hungary: A longitudinal study. European Journal of
Educational Research, 1(3), 255–269.
Piasecka, L. (2013). What does it feel like to use English? Empirical evidence from ESL students.
In P. Kuciel & S. Czaplak (Eds.), Language in cognition and affect. Berlin, Heidelberg:
Springer-Verlag.
Piechurska-Kuciel, E. (2008). Language anxiety in secondary grammar school students. Opole
University Press.
Piechurska-Kuciel, E (2012). Gender-dependent language anxiety in Polish communication
apprehensives. In Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 22, 227–248.
Piers, E. (1984). Piers-Harris children’s self-concept scale: Revised manual. Los Angeles:
Western Psychological Services.
Pipher, M. (1994). Reviving Ophelia: Saving the selves of adolescent girls. New York: Ballantine.
Porter, J. R., & Washington, R. E. (1993). Minority identity and self-esteem. Annual Review of
Sociology, 19, 139–161.
Prause, J., & Dooley, C. D. (2004). The social costs of underemployment. New York: Cambridge
University Press.
Pullmann, H., & Allik, J. (2008). Relations of academic and general self-esteem to school
achievement. Personality and Individual Differences, 45, 559–564.
Rashidi, N., Yamini, M., & Shafiei, E. (2012). Oral communication apprehension and affective
factors: Self-esteem and extroversion/introversion. Journal of English Language Teaching and
Learning, 7, 145–175.
Richards, L., Rollerson, B., & Phillips, J. (1991). Perceptions of submissiveness: Implications for
victimization. The Journal of Psychology, 125, 407–411.
Roberts, E. L., & Bengtson, V. L. (1993). Relationships with parents, self-esteem, and
psychological well-being in young adulthood. Social Psychology Quarterly, 56(4), 263–277.
References 169
Robins, R. W., Trzesniewski, K. H., Tracy, J. L., Gosling, S. D., & Potter, J. (2002). Global
self-esteem across the life span. Psychology and Aging, 17, 423–434.
Rosenberg, M. (1965). Rosenberg self-esteem scale. In Society and the adolescent self-image.
Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Rosenberg, M., & Pearlin, L. I. (1978). Social calass and self-esteem among children and adults.
American Journal of Sociology, 84(1), 53–77.
Rosenberg, M., Schooler, C., Schoenbach, C., & Rosenberg, F. (1995). Global self-esteem and
specific self-esteem: Different concepts, different outcomes. American Sociological Review, 60,
141–156.
Ross, C. E., & Broh, B. A. (2000). The roles of self-esteem and the sense of personal control in the
academic achievement process. Social Education, 73, 270–284.
Rowe, F., Stewart, D., & Patterson, C. (2007). Promoting school connectedness through whole
school approaches. Health Education, 107(6), 52.
Rubin, J., & Thomson, I. (1983). How to be a successful language learner. New York: Heinle and
Heinle.
Rubio, F. (2007). Self-esteem and foreign language learning: An introduction. In F. Rubio (Ed.),
Self-esteem and foreign language learning (pp. 2–12). Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars
Publishing.
Ryden, M. B. (1978). An adult version of the coopersmith self-esteem inventory: Testretest
reliability and social desirability. Psychological Reports, 43, 1189–1190.
Saebi, J. (2011). Relating learning strategies, self-esteem, intellectual functioning with academic
achievement among first-year engineering students. South African Journal of Psychology, 41
(2), 239–249.
Salmivalli, C., Kaukianen, A., Kaistaniemi, L., & Lagerspetz, K. M. J. (1999). Self-evaluated
self-esteem, peer-evaluated self-esteem, and defensive egotism as predictors of adolescents’
participation in bullying situations. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 25,
1268–1278.
Sanchez, F. J. P., & Roda, M. D. (2003). Relationships between self-concept and academic
achievement in primary students. Electronic Journal of Research in Educational Psychology
and Psychopedagogy, 1(1), 95–120.
Sander, P., & Sanders, L. (2006). Understanding academic confidence. Psychology Teaching
Review, 12(1), 29–39.
Schiffrin, H. (2014). Positive psychology and attachment: Positive affect as a mediator of
developmental outcomes. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 23(6), 1062–1072.
Schmader, T., Major, B., & Gramzow, R. H. (2001). Coping with ethnic stereotypes in the
academic domain: Perceived injustice and psychological disengagement. Journal of Social
Issues, 57(1), 93–111.
Schmitt, D. P., & Alik, J. (2005). Simultaneous administration of the Rosenberg self-esteem scale
in 53 nations: Exploring the universal and culture-specific feature of global self-esteem.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89(4), 623–642.
Schumann, J. (1998). The neurobiology of affect in language. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
Schwalbe, M. L., Gecas, V., & Baxter, R. (1986). The effects of occupational conditions and
individual characteristics on the importance of self-esteem sources in the workplace. Basic and
Applied Social Psychology, 7, 63–84.
Scott, C. G. (1999). Modeling self-esteem: The potential impact of school personnel on students.
Professional School Counseling, 2(5), 367–373.
Sedikides, C., Horton, R. S., & Gregg, A. P. (2007). The why’s the limit: Curtailing
self-enhancement with explanatory introspection. Journal of Personality, 75(4), 783–824.
Shackelford, T. K., & Michalski, R. L. (2011). Personality and self-esteem in newlyweds.
Personality and Individual Differences, 51, 870–872.
Shavelson, R. J., Hubner, J. J., & Stanton, G. C. (1976). Self-concept: Validation of construct
interpretations. Review of Educational Research, 46(3), 407–441.
170 References
Sherer, M., & Enbal, B. (2006). In the shadow of dispute: Self-esteem of Jewish and Arab youths
in Israel. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 30, 287–309.
Shore, A. (2016). Affect Regulation and the Origin of the Self: The Neurobiology of Emotional
Development. New York: Routledge.
Sikorski, W. (1997). Poziom samooceny uczniów a ich osiągnięcia w nauce szkolnej. Opieka
Wychowanie Terapia 2, 10–14.
Skaalvik, E. M., & Hagvet, K. A. (1990). Academic achievement and self-concept. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 58, 292.
Skaalvik, E. M., & Skaalvik, S. (2002). Internal and external frames of reference for academic
self-concept. Educational Psychologist, 37(93), 203–214.
Skehan, P. (1989). Individual differences in second-language learning. London: Edward Arnold.
Spolsky, B. (1989). Conditions for second language acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Stevick, E. (1980). Teaching Languages. A way and ways. Boston: Heinle & Heinle Publishers.
Stucke, T. S., & Sporer, S. L. (2002). When a grandiose self-image is threatened: Narcissism and
self-concept clarity as predictors of negative emotions and aggression following ego threat.
Journal of Personality, 70, 509–532.
Sullivan, A. (2009). Academic self-concept, gender and single-sex schooling. British Educational
Journal, 35(2), 259–288.
Tafarodi, R. W., & Walters, P. (1999). Individualism—Collectivism, life events and self-esteem: A
test of two trade-offs. European Journal of Social Psychology, 29, 794–814.
Taguchi, T., Magid, M., & Papi, M. (2009). The L2 motivational self-System amongst Chinese,
Japanese, and Iranian learners of English: a comparative study. In Z. Dörnyei & E. Ushioda
(Eds.), Motivation, Language Identity and the L2 Self (pp. 66–97). Buffalo, NY: Multilingual
Matters.
Tahir, W. B., & Inam, A. R. (2015). The relationship between social support and self-esteem of
adolescent girls. Journal Of Humanities And Social Science 20(2), 42–6.
Teoh, H. J., & Nur Afiqah, R. (2010). Self-esteem amongst young adults: The effect of gender, social
support and personality. Malaysian Psychiatric Association e-Journal Online Early, 19(2).
Trautwein, U., Lüdtke, O., Köller, O., & Baumert, J. (2006). Self-esteem, academic self-concept,
and achievement: How the learning environment moderates the dynamics of self-concept.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90, 334–349.
Tsai, J., Ying, Y., & Lee, P. A. (2001). Cultural predictors of self-esteem: A study of Chinese
American female and male young adults. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 7
(3), 284–297.
Twenge, J. M., & Crocker, J. (2002). Race and self-esteem: Meta-analyses comparing Whites,
Blacks, Hispanics, Asians, and American Indians and Comment on Gray-Little and Hafdahl
(2000). Psychological Bulletin, 128, 371–408.
Ushakova, T. N. (1994). Inner speech and second language acquisition: An experimental
theoretical approach. In J. P. Lantolf & G. Appel (Eds.), Vygotskian approaches to second
language research (pp. 135–156). Michigan: Hillsdale.
Ushioda, E., & Chen, S. A. (2011). Researching motivation and possible selves among learners of
English: The need to integrate qualitative inquiry. Anglistik: International Journal of English
Studies, 22(1), 43–61.
Valdivia, S., McLoughlin, D., & Mynard, J. (2011). The importance of affective factors in
self-access language learning courses. Studies in Self-Access Learning Journal, 2(2), 91–96.
Valiente, C., Swanson, J., & Eisenberg, N. (2012). Linking students’ emotions and academic
achievement: When and why emotions matter. Child Developmental Perspectives, 6(2),
129–135.
Vaux, A., Phillips, J., Holly, L., Thomson, B., Williams, D., & Stewart, D. (1986). The social
support appraisals (SS-A) scale: Studies of reliability and validity. American Journal of
Community Psychology, 14, 195–219.
References 171
Verkuyten, M., & Thijs, J. (2004). Psychological disengagement from the academic domain
among ethnic minority adolescents in the Netherlands. The British Journal of Educational
Psychology, 74(1), 109–125.
Veselska, Z., Madarasova-Geckova, A., Gajdosova, B., Orosova, O., van Dijk, J. P., & Reijneveld,
S. A. (2010). Socio-economic differences in self-esteem of adolescents influenced by
personality, mental health and social support. Public Health, 125(11), 763–768.
Vohs, K. D., & Heatherton, T. F. (2006). Self-esteem and threats to self: Implications for
self-construals and interpersonal perceptions. Journal of Personal and Social Psychology, 81
(6), 1103–1118.
Vonk, R., & Smit, H. (2011). Optimal self-esteem is contingent: Intrinsic versus extrinsic and
upward versus downward contingencies. European Journal of Personality.
Weissbrott-Koziarska, A. (2005). Społeczne funkcjonowanie dziecka wiejskiego w młodszym wieku
szkolnym. Opole: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Opolskiego.
Wenden, A. (1998). Learner strategies in language learning. Great Britain: Prentice Hall.
White, R. W. (1963). Ego and Reality in Psychoanalytic Theory: A Proposal Regarding Independent
Ego Energies. Psychological Issues, 3(3). New York: International Universities Press.
Wiltfang, G., & Scarbecz, M. (1990). Social class and adolescents self-esteem another look. Social
Psychology Quarterly, 53, 174–183.
Wong, E., Wiest, D., & Cusick, L. (2002). Perceptions of autonomy support, parent attachment,
competence and self-worth as predictors of motivational orientation and academic achieve-
ment: An examination of sixth-and-ninth grade regular education students. Adolescence, 37
(146), 255–266.
Wylie, R. C. (1979). The self-concept. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press.
Yashima, T., Zenuk-Nishide, L., & Shimizu, K. (2004). The influence of attitudes and affect on
willingness to communicate and UNIVERSITY OF SYDNEY PAPERS IN TESOL 57 second
language communication. Language Learning, 54(1), 119–152.
Yaikhong, K., & Usaha, S. (2012). A measure of EFL public speaking class anxiety: Scale
development and preliminary validation and reliability. English Language Teaching, 5(12),
23–35.
Yazdanmehr, E. (2011). The interrelationship of EFL learners’ self-esteem and their academic
achievement in private language institutes of Iran. Continental Journal of Social Sciences, 4(3),
1–25.
Yeung, A. S., & Wong, K. P. (2004). Domain specificity of trilingual teachers’ verbal self-
concepts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96(2), 360–368.
Young, J. F., & Mroczek, D. K. (2003). Predicting intraindividual self-concept trajectories during
adolescence. Journal of Adolescence, 26, 586–600.
Żakowska, M. (2007). Polacy. In A. de Lazari, O. Nadskakuły i M. Żakowskiej (Eds.),
Zaprogramowanie kulturowe narodów Europy, Łódź.
Zare, P., & Riasati, M. (2012). The relationship between language learning anxiety, self-esteem,
and academic level among Iranian EFL learners. Pertanika Journal of Social Sciences and
Humanities, 20(1), 219–225.
Zeigler-Hill, V. (2010). The interpersonal nature of self-esteem: Do different measures of
self-esteem possess similar interpersonal content? Journal of Research in Personality, 44, 22–
30.
Zheng, Y. (2008). Anxiety and second/foreign language learning revisited. Canadian Journal for
New Scholars in Education, 1(1), 1–12.
Zimmerman, B. J. (2001). Theories of self-regulated learning and academic achievement: An
overview and analysis. In B. J. Zimmerman & D. H. Schunk (Eds.), Self-regulated learning
and academic achievement: Theoretical perspectives (2nd ed., pp. 1–38). New York:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Zitzmann, N. A. (2005). Peer relations and academic achievement in early elementary school.
MA Thesis, Louisiana State University.
172 References
Websites
Anderson, J. (2002). Self-esteem: The myth of the century. http://web.campbell.edu/faculty/asbury/

sample_paper.pdf. Accessed September 20, 2011.
Anderson-Meger, J. (2014). Examining knowledge beliefs to motivate studentlearning. http://
www.facultyfocus.com/articles/teaching-and-learning/examine-knowledge-beliefs-motivate-
student-learning/. Accessed March 6, 2017.
Chaika, G. (2012). Ten activities to improve students’ self-concepts. http://www.educationworld.
com/a_lesson/lesson/lesson085.shtml/. Accessed March 6, 2017.
Gallagher, E. (2016). The effects of teacher-student relationships: Social and academic outcomes
of low-income middle and high school students. http://steinhardt.nyu.edu/appsych/opus/issues/
2013/fall/gallagher. Accessed August 22, 2016.
Gimeno, V. V. (2002). Grammar learning through strategy training: A clasroom study on learning
conditionals through metacognitive and cognitive strategy training. Doctoral dissertation.
https://proxy.knjiznice.ffzg.hr. Accessed August 11, 2016.
http://selfesteem2go.com/self-esteem-programs.html. Accessed September 20, 2011.
http://ehlt.flinders.edu.au/education/DLiT/1999/WEBNOTES/website/history.htm. Accessed
September 25, 2011.
http://psychology.about.com/od/cindex/. Accessed July 28, 2014.
Kazumata, K. (1989). Roles of self-esteem in second language oral production performance.
Retrieved from http://www.radaris.asia/p/Tina/Keiko/#sthash.GpU6ArvY.dpu.
Kelsey, J., Simons (2014). The challenges of adolescence. The Journal of Child Health Care.
http://chc.sagepub.com/site/VSI/The%20Challenges%20of%20adolescence.pdf. Accessed
November 26, 2016.
McLeod, S. A. (2016). Maslow’s hierarchy of needs. Retrieved from www.simplypsychology.org/
maslow.html.
Suzuki, M. The ideal L2 selves of Japanese English learners at different motivational level. http://
daigakuin.soka.ac.jp/assets/files/pdf/major/kiyou/23_lang4.pdf. Accessed August 4, 2016.
TEFL/TESL. http:/birmingham.ac.uk/Documents/college-artslaw/cels/essays/secondlanguage/
essayGLLSThompson.pdf. Accessed February 16, 2017.
Thompson, S. (2005). The good language learner. Birmingham University.

El Rol de La Autoestima en El Aprendizaje de Idiomas

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

El Rol de La Autoestima en El Aprendizaje de Idiomas

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Second Language Learning and Teaching

More information about this series at http://www.springer.com/series/10129

The Role of Self-Esteem

ISSN 2193-7648 ISSN 2193-7656 (electronic)

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Printed on acid-free paper

1 Psychological and Pedagogical Background of Self-esteem . . . . . . .. 1

1.8 Self-esteem and Learning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38

5 Conclusions and Implications for the EFL Classroom . . . . . . . . . . . 141

Fig. 1.1 Self-concept model based on Shavelson, Hubner,

Table 1.1 The major contributors to the development of the construct

Table 3.12 FLSE and English-speaking relatives

a sample that represents three stages of education—from lower secondary to ter-

Self-esteem is a well-researched psychological construct, found to be critical to

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018 1

1.1 Cognition and Affect as Inextricable Components

Any learning behaviour is underpinned by cognitive processes such as perceiving,

2. Responding: active participation of the learner—answering, complying, helping,

1.2 The Importance of the Affective Domain in General

1.2.1 Psychological Functioning

(Lyubomirsky et al., 2005; Rowe, Stewart, & Patterson, 2007). McElwain,

1.2.3 Second Language Acquisition (SLA)

cognitive processing. A certain shift in emphasis was triggered by the claims of

• Learner styles—a predisposition toward processing information in a speciﬁc

1.3 Self and Self-related Concepts

1.3.1 Self-esteem from the Historical Perspective

has broadened and it may be worthwhile to elaborate on its most comprehensive

1.3.2 The Typology of Self-esteem

• global—general self-worth, global perception of self as a person

1.3.3 Other Typologies of Self-esteem

The attempts at conceptualizing the construct have led researchers to discovering

1.3.3.1 Trait and State Self-esteem

1.3.3.2 Contingent and True Self-esteem

Both global and domain-speciﬁc self-esteem can be contingent, that is based on

1.3.3.3 Explicit and Implicit, Fragile and Genuine Self-esteem

Some of the qualitative distinctions made in reference to self-esteem are related to

1.3.4 The Antecedents of Self-esteem

1.3.4.1 Social Background

self-esteem is parents’ work history. The father’s regular employment positively

1.3.4.2 Parental Characteristics and Parent-Child Relationships

As Coopersmith (1967) explains ‘the regulatory procedures employed by the par-

1.3.4.3 Personal Characteristics

It seems that certain features of physique go with an individual’s self-esteem.

1.3.4.4 The Experience of Success and Failure

person has experienced. Researchers, however, have taken into consideration a

1.3.4.5 Genetic Influences

Apart from an environmentally determined component, self-esteem also has an

Thus, if children receive a positive feedback on their inherited features of character,

1.3.5 Other Self-related Constructs: Self-concept

and self-evaluations in speciﬁc domains” that contribute to general perception of

Skaalvik and Skaalvik (2002) identiﬁed ﬁve major antecedents of self-concept:

In comparison with self-esteem and self-concept, self-efﬁcacy has a rather short

influences the choices people make in speciﬁc situations, for example—whether to

1.3.5.3 The Interdependence of Self-esteem, Self-concept

Fig. 1.2 The model of

Psychology (1890) by one of the pioneer researchers into the construct—William

Fig. 1.3 The relation between self-esteem, self-concept and self-efﬁcacy

1.4 Self-esteem Development Across the Life Span

Age differences in self-esteem have been researched extensively in view of

The consideration given to children’s self-perceptions should be focused on

1.4.4 Old Age

1.5 Self-esteem and Gender

The impact of gender on self-beliefs evokes a lot of scholarly interest. According to