Motivational Factors in Learning American Sign Language

Motivational Factors in Learning American Sign Language

Harry G. LangSusan FosterDonna GustinaGary MowlYufang LiuNational Technical Institute for the DeafRochester Institute of Technology

This study focuses on factors that motivate and demotivateprofessionals to learn American Sign Language (ASL). Us-ing a qualitative approach known as the Critical IncidentTechnique (CIT), faculty and staff were asked to reflect ontheir sign language learning experiences, and their responseswere examined for motivational patterns. Principal motiva-ting factors were intrinsic in nature, including a desire to per-form well in one's position, personal goals, and an interest insign language per se. Integrative factors were also important,especially an interest in social interactions with deaf people.Principal factors that demorivated the respondents weremore extrinsic in nature, dealing with workload, scheduling,issues associated with the sign language curriculum, instruc-tion, and the attitudes of self and others. We draw implica-tions from the findings for the enhancement of sign languageinstruction programs.

Several recent investigations have shown the ability tosign clearly as one of the most important characteris-tics of effective teachers in classrooms having predomi-nant enrollments of deaf young adult learners. In astructured response study by Lang, McKee, and Con-ner (1993), 32 teaching characteristics were ranked andrated by classroom teachers, deaf students, and admin-istrators in a large postsecondary program. The abilityto sign clearly was both highly ranked and highly ratedby all groups in terms of its importance to studentlearning of course content. In an unstructured re-

Corrcjpondence should be sent to Harry Lang, Department of Educa-tional and Career Research, National Technical Institute for theDeaf, 52 Lomb Memorial Drive, Rochester, NY 14623 (e-mail:[email protected]).

Copyright e 19% Oxford University Press. CCC 1081-4959

sponse study by Lang, Dowaliby, and Anderson (1994),839 critical incidents were collected in interviews with56 deaf students who were asked to reflect on theirclassroom learning experiences and describe in detailexamples of effective and ineffective teaching. Of the 33characteristics of effective teaching derived from thesestudent reflections, the ability to sign clearly emergedwith the highest frequency of occurrence, accountingfor 10.4% of the incidents.

With regard to characteristics of effective teaching,these two investigations provided some common re-sults, particularly this focus on the importance of signcommunication proficiency. At the same time, however,the employment of different methodologies resulted incertain unique patterns in the perceptions of deaf stu-dents. For example, the unstructured response studyled to a greater emphasis on affective teaching behav-iors. Similar results have been found in critical incidentstudies with hearing students. While one approachalone would be informative, taken together these struc-tured and unstructured response studies expand ourinformation base considerably.

We applied a similar approach to the study of moti-vation in adults learning American Sign Language(ASL). In our first study (Lang, Foster, Gustina,Mowl, & Liu, 1996), we used a structured-responsemeasure to identify motivational and attitudinal orien-tations in learning ASL as a second language. In thisstudy, faculty and staff were free to introduce their ownmotivational factors (i.e., unstructured responses). The

Dow

nloaded from https://academ

ic.oup.com/jdsde/article/1/3/202/496273 by guest on 13 M

arch 2022

Motivational Factors in Learning ASL 203

purpose of this study was to identify the general factorsthat promote or hinder motivation in learning ASLamong hearing professionals who work with deaf per-sons in an educational institution.

Method

Subjects. Subjects for this study were drawn from thefaculty and staff of a large postsecondary program fordeaf students, where the acquisition of sign languageis an expectation of employment and training in signlanguage is available and encouraged. In total, 176 per-sons were sent a packet containing a series of question-naires, including a background survey, quantitative in-struments (Lang et al., 1996) and the qualitativeinstrument reported in this paper.

The respondent group for the qualitative instru-ment includes 110 faculty, 44 professional staff, 19 gen-eral staff, and three people who did not identify a jobcategory. The primary areas of responsibility of the re-spondents are shown in Table 1. The hearing facultyand staff respondents in this study were largely experi-enced employees with 66.1% having worked for 10 ormore years at this school and 87.0% reporting morethan five years' experience. One hundred and thirty-two of the 176 respondents (75.0%) had enrolled in fiveor more ASL courses at this school prior to this investi-gation, and 78 (44.3%) had studied 10 or more courses.

Instrument. We used the Critical Incident Technique(CIT), an unstructured response method. Flanagan(1954) originally applied the CIT to personnel evalua-tion and training situations. The ihethod involves thecollection of incidents or behaviors from persons whoobserved them and the subsequent categorization ofself-reports into evident dimensions. Respondentswere asked to describe in writing three factors that mo-tivated them to learn ASL and three factors that de-motivated them. For the purpose of this study, ASLis defined as the range of form from meaning-based,English-like signing with ASL features to more purelystructured ASL. There were no restrictions on thelength or style of the response; rather, it was open-ended. Responses were coded and studied for patternsand themes.

Table 1 Primary areas of responsibility of respondents

Primary area

TeachingManagementResearchCounselingInstructional development and media specialistsSupport department (tutors)InterpretingOperations/marketingClericalDid not respondTotal

n

672576

1811142

197

176

Results

Seven hundred and forty-nine responses were received(not everyone listed three motivating factors and threedemotivating factors). Four raters then reviewed thesewritten comments. Based on this preliminary analysis,five categories of motivating factors and seven catego-ries of demotivating factors were generated. Each com-ment was then coded for a specific category by the fourraters, working independently. When this activity wascompleted, the raters met to discuss their coding deci-sions, comment by comment. For a comment to be re-tained for further analysis, three out of four raters musthave included it in the same category. Analysis of the723 responses meeting this criterion provide furtherinsight into the adult learner in the professional con-text and provide implications for ASL instructors. Inthe following two sections of the article, we describerespondents' comments in detail, using excerpts fromtheir written statements as illustrations. Responses arebroadly organized according to whether they wereoffered as "motivating factors" or "demotivatingfactors."

Motivating Factors

As illustrated in Table 2, the 403 comments describing

motivating factors were coded within five categories:

(1) job-related, (2) interest in language, (3) personal

reasons, (4) social interaction, and (5) general commu-

nication. When the frequencies of the comments are

considered, the "job-related" category was dominant

for faculty, with nearly six out of every 10 comments

Dow



arch 2022

204 Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education 1:3 Summer 1996

Table 2 Factors influencing the motivation of adults learning sign language

Motivating factorsJob-relatedInterest in languagePersonal reasonsSocial interactionGeneral communication

Demotivating factorsWorkload/scheduleSign curriculumAttitudes of othersSign instructionAttitudes of selfSchool expectationsPracrice opportunity

Faculty (110)

154(62.6)28(11.4)28(11.4)25(10.2)11 ( 4.5)

246

41 (19.8)43 (20.8)29(14.0)39 (18.8)20 ( 9.7)29 (14.0)6 ( 2.9)

207

Professional staff (44)

47 (45.2)20 (19.2)20 (19.2)8( 7.7)9 ( 8.7)

104

17(21.3)11(13.8)18 (22.5)7 ( 8.8)

15 (18.8)4 ( 5.0)8 (10.0)

80

General staff (19)

32 (60.4)8(15.1)2 ( 3.8)7(13.2)4 ( 7.5)

53

8 (24.2)2( 6.1)6(18.1)4(12.1)7(21.1)4(12.1)2( 6.1)

33

Total

233 (57.0)56 (13.9)50(12.4)37 ( 9.2)27 ( 6.7)

403

66 (20.6)56(17.5)53 (16.6)50 (15.6)42(13.1)37(11.6)16 ( 5.0)

320

falling into this category. Professional and general staffalso had high frequencies in this category. Additionalanalysis by category follows.

Job-related. For all respondents (faculty and staff), thiscategory accounted for 57.0% of the motivational com-ments, which were grouped within four subcategories:effectiveness in one's primary area of responsibility,group interactions, institute expectations, and careerdevelopment. Subcategory analysis provided compel-ling evidence that faculty and staff are most motivatedby the desire to be effective in their primary work, orto interact professionally with deaf colleagues.

Some of the comments regarding effectiveness intheir jobs were general. "Performing my job well re-quires fluency," wrote one respondent. "I desire toperform my job to the best of my ability and the ex-pectations and standards of my supervisors." Othersprovided detail in describing specific job functions, asin the following example:

In my field, counseling, it is important to noticesubtleties in verbal (including signed) and nonver-bal behavior. Fluency is important so that I canconcentrate on the message and meaning of whata student/client conveys rather than just trying tounderstand the transmission (so to speak). Signfluency allows me to do real counseling work which

starts with rapport. You can't have as much rapportif you are struggling to understand the signs!

Similarly, teachers described how they wanted toconvey clearly their thoughts, ideas, and feelings totheir students. During classes, when they saw studentswho needed a fuller understanding of a concept, theysometimes felt "lost, frustrated, and annoyed" thattheir sign skills would not permit them to provide in-struction more effectively. "I do a lot of interactivework in the classroom," wrote one person, "that is, get-ting students to discourse with one another. Often I'membarrassed and ashamed that I don't completely un-derstand. It feels like I get bits and pieces of their dia-logue, never the whole." Those who were starting toteach with little or no sign language skills felt they hadno contact, bond, or trust. "Frustration" was, in fact,a common word found in the responses of even moreexperienced teachers. Some teachers emphasized thatthey wanted to grapple with ideas in class—not withcommunication issues and styles. Some respondents'comments included introspective reflection on theteaching process, as illustrated by the following threeexamples:

I was motivated to learn sign language because Iwanted to be the best teacher possible for my deafstudents. Good teaching requires good communi-

Dow



arch 2022


cation. This reality cannot be denied. It is virtuallyimpossible to teach deaf students complex contentwithout effective sign language skills. In fact, I be-lieve a similar comparison can be made for deaf stu-dents who have inadequate English skills, in termsof frustration, stress, and an inability to effectivelycommunicate with hearing individuals. It adds anew dimension to teaching.

I found often I was misinterpreting messages be-cause the signs were coming too fast. So I thoughtthe same might be happening to students who weretrying to use English.

Certain recent course activities have convinced methat the "way" many of us sign is simply "noninter-pretable" without hearing or at least lip reading tofill in gaps or make sense of erroneous signs.

The second largest of the four job-related subcate-gories pertained to the need to effectively communicatein ASL with deaf colleagues in group meetings, espe-cially committees and department meetings (23.6%).As skills improved, there was a sense of satisfaction andincreased relaxed acceptance by deaf peers that provedmotivating. In the words of one respondent, "Patienceand flexibility of deaf people was a strong factor in mymotivation to improve." Interaction with deaf faculty,staff, and students in groups provided the respondentswith unique opportunities to know and understandlearning needs and behaviors. "It was important for mein order to work collaboratively with my deaf col-leagues—on committees, workshops. I want communi-cation to flow easily with deaf colleagues and friends. Iwant to earn the respect of my coworkers and friends.I want our interactions to be as unencumbered as pos-sible." Other respondents emphasized the need to im-prove their sign language proficiency—for their ownsake. As one person commented, the "need to knowwhat's going on at department meetings, in hallwayconversations, etc, is a real motivating force in learningsign language."

School expectations for ASL proficiency for pro-motion and tenure were mentioned as a motivating fac-tor in nearly two out of every 10 of the job-related re-sponses. These respondents basically accepted thenotion of sign proficiency as an institute "require-

ment" of the job. As one respondent wrote, "If Iworked in Japan, I would be expected to learn Jap-anese."

Lastly, the opportunity for advancement (i.e., ca-reer development) as a motive was described in 13.3%of the job-related responses. For example, one personexplained that "the jobs I am interested in require ex-tensive sign language knowledge—I could not get apromotion without advanced skills." Others mentionedspecific goals, such as receiving the Deaf Studies Cer-tificate or becoming an interpreter.

Interest in language. The second largest category of re-sponses regarding motivating factors (13.9%) relatedto a fascination with the visual beauty of. As one per-son said, "sign was intriguing, beautiful, honest." An-other felt that ASL could express ideas that have noexpression in other languages: "Some languages appearcold and stoic to me. Some are boring and do not stirmy emotions. American Sign Language is very inti-mate and meaningful. It sometimes express an emotionthat no word could ever express. It reaches my soul."Over time, this fascination with sign language proved amotivation for learning:

For someone totally unfamiliar with sign language,I couldn't take my eyes off of people using it. Themore I learn about sign and ASL, the more inr

trigued I become with the concept of a insual lan-guage—how is our thinking shaped by visual lan-guage—how it differs from aural/oral language;how visual literacy is developed, etc

Personal reasons. The category of motivational factorsassociated with personal goals or experiences (12.4%)included a high "achievement motivation" that, sug-gests one respondent, "led me to try to be the best Ican be at everything I do." Comments in this categorydid not specifically relate to one's job. Another personwrote, "I have never liked being average and have quit/dropped only activities for which I did not show apti-tude." Some felt learning sign language gave them abroader perspective on the world:

By communicating with deaf people, I have more

insights into what different people think, "hear",

Dow



arch 2022


feel, and experience in life. I find it broadens my

perspectives and understandings.

There were also both general and specific com-ments about the value of positive feedback from deafstudents and colleagues as a personal motivational fac-tor. In the words of one respondent, "Success breedssuccess." Others were motivated by watching hearingcolleagues who sign fluently. Also mentioned were thepatience of students during the first few months ofteaching and private tutoring early in one's experiencewhile learning ASL. Respondents described specificindividuals who personally motivated them, includingASL instructors, friends, peers, chairpersons, relatives,and interpreters.

Social interaction. The desire for effective social interac-tion accounted for 9.2% of the comments regardingmotivating factors. This category included the desireto interact with deaf people in general, as well as inter-est in developing friendships with a specific deaf per-son. The following quotations are illustrative:

Wanting to interact with deaf people. Specifically,the more sign language I learned, the more deaffriends I made, and the more deaf friends I got toknow, the more my sign language improved.

The basis of all friendships is good communicationand compromise. In a deaf-hearing friendship,I feel it is my responsibility to communicate asclearly as I possibly can and in turn, my friend hasthe same responsibility. Meeting each other halfway is what real friendship is all about.

General communication. Motivation as a sense of "fair-ness" prevailed among many respondents, who felt thatit was important to communicate well with everyonewith whom they worked. This category acounted for6.7% of the comments regarding motivation. "I felt itwas important as a staff member," wrote one individual,"to learn American Sign Language and to learn aboutdeaf culture." Another explained that the decision towork in a setting where ASL is used carries with it theobligation to learn the language:

If I choose to work/live in a place that speaks a lan-guage other than my own, I am obligated to learn

the language of the region—not require them toadapt to me.

Those new to the environment usually felt left outof many social/casual conversations. Formal situationswere usually handled by the presence of an interpreter.They felt embarrassed and very uncomfortable becausethey could not communicate. In the words of one per-son, "when I first got here I felt very isolated because Iwasn't able to talk to deaf people I worked with or metwhile working here. I felt I was missing out by not be-ing able to engage in more than extremely superficialconversations with most of the deaf people I'd meet."Others felt it was an issue of respecting studentsneeds/rights. "All students have the right to expectthat their environment will make every effort to com-municate regardless of their orientation, i.e., spokenEnglish or ASL." Another wrote that "it seemed to methat deaf students and colleagues spend their whole lifetrying to find ways to communicate with me—I felt Icould at least try to mee"t them halfway." Regardless,the ability to sign was seen as essential in the environ-ment, whether it be in the classroom, office, or any-where in the buildings—deaf students ask questions ofanyone deaf or hearing, and the skill needed to respondeffectively is critical.

Demotivating Factors

Analysis of the respondents' 320 comments regardingfactors that have a negative impact on their learning ofASL yielded seven categories (Table 2): (1) workload/schedule, (2) sign language curriculum, (3) attitudesof others, (4) sign instruction, (5) attitudes of self,(6) school expectations, and (7) practice opportunities.

With frequencies of comments considered, facultyand staff workloads, the sign language curriculum, atti-tudes of others, and the quality of sign instruction ap-pear as dominant factors with regard to demotivatingexperiences. We describe these and other categories inmore depth below.

Workload/scheduling. Of the 320 comments offeredabout factors that demotivate faculty and staff, 20.6%focused on the issues of workload, scheduling, and theconcern about time constraints. Time away from the

Dow



arch 2022


desk meant more pressure when they returned aftersign class. Some felt discouraged that while sign lan-guage proficiency is described as a priority by theschool, other responsibilities assigned by supervisorsoften made it difficult to pursue sign communicationskills development. The conflict between "trying towork in a very fast-paced, high-pressured office andjustifying] leaving work to attend sign classes" proveda barrier to learning sign. For those whose scheduleswere already overloaded, finding time to attend signclass was difficult if not impossible. And as the follow-ing comment illustrates, learning sign language can bevery time consuming for some respondents:

Amount of time required to really master sign.What can I say—we all know the pressures aroundhere now. A three-hour [sign language] course, plusa minimum of two hours outside of class is fivehours a week or about 10% of our work week. Thatis a major chunk of time for most of us.

Nineteen of the respondents' comments indicatedthat some professionals were less motivated when theycould not find a good fit of available instruction in thefree times in their schedules. Most often the difficultiesrevolved around finding times to attend sign classesthat do not conflict with teaching schedules, committeework, and regular department or team meetings.

Sign language curriculum. Fifty-six (17.5%) of the com-ments pertained to negative experiences of the respon-dents in sign language courses. The most frequentlycited factor associated with the curriculum was theperception that the courses were too general, lacking invariety and challenge. One third of all the commentsrelated to this factor. Other factors of note included theheterogeneity of the language skill level of the learnersin their classes, the lack of application in the courses(particularly to simultaneous communication experi-ences, which most teachers use in their own teaching),and assessment within the sign language courses. In thewords of one respondent, "I'm . . . sick of inappropri-ate people being placed in high level ASL courses.[The] course is ultimately brought down to their level."

Several respondents believed that interaction be-tween professionals and students in their courses wasmissing and that such would be beneficial. Other fac-

tors mentioned by respondents included the structureof classes offered, with several expressing preference tolearn on their own, using self-paced resources; or signcourses that meet their special needs for skills develop-ment (for example, an individual was interestedin learning how to do a professional presentationto a "mixed" audience—hearing and deaf—in sign-supported English). Some observed a need for moreconsistent feedback from instructors or had lost somemotivation because of the final exam interview at theend of each course. ("I get so nervous and literally'freeze' and usually do very poorly during the finaltest") The institution of sign language course gradesdiscouraged six respondents; one expressed the per-ception that grades were "demeaning the integrity ofthe professor. . . . I could see myself beginning to 'workfor a grade' rather than learn the content, and that issilly and unproductive." Another felt that "meaningfuland consistent benchmarks to self-monitor and main-tain direction and commitment" were missing. This re-spondent continued, "At the end of the first three signcourses, I knew I had responsibility and command ofabout 600 English term equivalents. I have felt some-what more adrift ever since. . . . I need internal bench-marks."

Courses tailored to the educational classroom ex-periences and skills needed in the classroom were pre-.ferred by a few responding teachers:

[I see] little, if any, transfer of sign skills from [signlanguage] classes to my classroom or to social situa-tions. I'll put time into sign classes and for somereason I see little actual transfer to the classroom.I'm delighted when I see the transfer; discouragedwhen I don't.

[I prefer] methods and resources that relate to my

needs as an educator. Fewer tapes and examples of

stories and interaction in social contexts. I tutor ab-

stract concepts in math and statistics and computer

applications. I would like to see examples/samples

of students] coming in with problems and mod-

eled responses.

Attitudes of others. Fifty-one comments (15.9%) about

experiences diat had a negative influence on motivation

related to the attitude of others. For example, respon-

Dow



arch 2022


dents were discouraged when they felt that deaf per-sons "looked down on" or "bad mouthed" them be-cause their signing was progressing slowly or they wereunable to communicate in ASL. For one respondent,this experience "hits a 'nerve' and makes me less moti-vated to learn. I learn best in a supportive rather thanadversarial environment." Another reported that"when I hear deaf professionals complain about theskills and motivation of hearing faculty regarding signlanguage, I become very discouraged." Occasionally,respondents reported experiences in which they wereridiculed for their lack of proficiency, as in the follow-ing comment:

Deaf individuals who use their language as a meansof testing, teasing, or embarrassing others. Teasingan individual by signing real fast or spelling some-thing just to test the other person's proficiency.

Another group of comments about attitude focusedon the perception that some deaf people take an ex-treme view regarding sign language, that is, ASL is theonly acceptable form of sign language, or voice shouldnot be used at all when signing. This perceived extrem-ism was also characterized as an unwillingness to ac-cept a diverse range of views and the sense that onemust be either "for us" or "against us," with no middleground or potential for dialogue. The following com-ments explain:

Extremism on the part of a minority deaf factiontrying to force their viewpoints on all others. I seethis as "anti-diversity", i.e., only ASL, no voice, nolip, etc

Deaf militancy. No one should have such belliger-ant attitudes and be nonaccepting of one's differ-ences. Communication is a two-way process, equalresponsibility.

Closely related to the comments described above isthe feeling expressed by some respondents that politicshave taken over the discussion and practice of sign lan-guage in the school. As revealed by the comments be-low, this can result in a belief that students are not be-ing well served, strained relationships with deafcolleagues, and a growing sense of "majority/minor-ity" rather than collegial interaction:

I am less motivated to improve my sign languageskills because the politics of sign language has be-come more important than the deaf students weserve. Deaf militants continue to push ASL downeveryone's throat even though fifty percent of ourstudents come from mainstreamed programs. ASLis not the most effective means of communicatingwith many of our students yet this "power play"continues to separate and divide us with littlethought given to how all our students will best learnin the classroom.

Political differences. I don't know if I am all forASL, and it's considered heresy by the Deaf com-munity. I feel more isolated by politics now, frommy deaf friends.

The political reality of being from the majority. Itis difficult to face the fears and insecurity of inter-personal relationships with a group who do notidentify their language preferences honestly. Imean what is SimCom to deaf people—oppressionor insight?

Sign language instruction. Fifty comments (15.6%) fo-

cused on sign language instruction. Of these, 70%were associated with the perception that the sign lan-guage teachers the respondents studied under were nottrained well to teach adult learners. Twenty-eight ofthese 35 comments focused on the quality of instruc-tion in general, while the remaining seven specificallymentioned the teacher as not being perceived as a bilin-gual (i.e., able to communicate in both ASL and En-glish, signed or spoken). Of the remaining 15 com-ments, 13 described sign teachers as either boring (8)or insensitive (5). In some cases, the instructors wereperceived as critical, impatient, unmotivated, or unpre-pared. In other cases, responders felt that the teacherapproached the instruction from a political perspectiverather than a linguistic perspective, as the following ex-ample shows:

Politically-based instructor attitudes. The joy oflanguage learning was sometimes negated by thepersistent negativity of the instructor as his/herpolitical/social/linguistic views permeated thelearning process. My acceptance of Deaf culture1

Dow



arch 2022


was set back for years until I re-found the satisfac-tion of cross-cultural participation in other, morepositive ways.

Some respondents commented on specific methodsused by sign instructors. One person felt that his timewas wasted because there was "too much emphasis onwatching other hearing people in sign classes. . . . Ispent hours watching hearing people sign poorly." An-other felt less motivated because the instructor had ahabit of leaving the room while the class was left to"learn by videotapes."

Teacher affect was another factor. Instructors whowere perceived as not liking hearing people or whofailed to present a balanced perspective regarding oraland sign communication were sometimes suggested asreasons for becoming less motivated:

Teacher had a 'Deaf Power' agenda, and showedthat [he/she] did not like hearing people.

Instructors' (apparent) attitudes towards signedEnglish and any topic related to speech communi-cation (oral education, lipreading, etc). Everycourse I attended included at least one story—pro-vided for receptive practice, usually—that toutedthe evils of oralism. There was never any attemptto provide a balance, despite the varied educationalbackgrounds of our students. Opinions on adults'responses to speech instruction were mindlesslyextended to education of children. There was noconcern for the difference between fact and isolatedpersonal experiences.

Attitudes of self. Fears of failure, rejection, and embar-rassment were mentioned in 13.1% of the comments.These respondents expressed concern that their "ini-tial feeble attempts" at signed conversations would beunacceptable or ridiculed. They feared using incorrectsigns and not being understood. Sometimes the anxietywas expressed in terms of sign language classroom situ-ations, especially when classmates were more fluentthan the respondent. In other cases, the anxiety wasgeneralized to any situation in which the respondentsfelt self-conscious about their sign ability. Some ex-amples follow:

My own inhibitions/insecurities. I don't like hav-

ing my lack of competence in signing exposed. I be-come very self conscious and tense, especially in acompetitive environment.

Embarrassment or self-consciousness in classes

with much better signers. Frustration and impa-

tience with myself. Becoming fluent in sign lan-

guage is much more difficult than it is perceived to

be by the public

Comprehension frustrations. I was learning to ex-press myself (or so I thought) with sign better andmore quickly than I was able to understand anoth-er's signs. Receptive fingerspelling has always beena problem for me.

School expectations. The sixth largest category of factors(11.6%) was the expectations of the school signaled bypolicy. For these respondents, making specific levels ofsign proficiency a condition for promotion and tenurehad affected their motivation negatively. As one person 'noted, "when I wanted to learn sign language to com-municate with colleagues and friends, my motivationwas higher than when the [school] said I must learn signlanguage." Another respondent remarked that the es-tablishment of school requirements for learning signlanguage had reduced the activity to "a contractualtraining activity . . . [that] tends to replace the once im-portant 'desire' to learn and grow in our knowledge"about deafness. My desire to grow in my ability to com-municate has been replaced by more work-relatedexpectation. It has become depersonalized." For theseindividuals, intrinsic, or self, motivation is more im-portant than extrinsic motivation such as that exertedby the school.

Some respondents were discouraged by their per-ception that they had to "relearn" how to sign. Manyhad learned sign language before the Institute had de-veloped a curriculum that taught ASL as a second lan-guage. Most had learned signs for English words. Verylittle ASL grammar or information about Deaf culturewas included in the previous curriculum. The empha-sis on signed English, they perceived, was no longerthe "acceptable way." Several felt that sign languageproficiency was not considered an important priorityby their chairpeople, since these skills were not evalu-ated by them. Encouragement to develop sign language

Dow



arch 2022


communication proficiency was rare. There was alsothe perception of a lack of appreciation from adminis-trators for the struggle to learn sign language. "An atti-tude exists which is one of tolerating an employee'sabsence from daily job to attend classes but not ap-preciated," wrote one respondent. "There seems to besome inequality in 'time away' from job between fac-ulty and staff?'

Thirteen of the responses associated with schoolexpectations focused on the evaluation process knownas the Sign Communication Proficiency Interview(SCPI). For these respondents, the experience wasnegative due to individual interviewers or to the factthat their ratings seemed to be lower than expected.

The subjectiveness of the SCPI. I took the SCPItwice with two sign classes sandwiched between—no improvement. I don't understand how 13 yearsago I learned very quickly and now I am incapableof learning—I don't think so. I am in favor of theSCPI as long as a curriculum is in place to bringpeople along.

Practice opportunity. The final category of factors (5.0%)related mostly to the lack of opportunities to practicewhat is learned. For some respondents, their job at theschool did not bring them into daily contact with deafpersons, which made it difficult for them to practicewhat they were learning in sign class. Others felt thatthe inability to use sign language outside of work madeit difficult to improve their skill level. As one personcommented, "I am an adult with a personal and privatelife outside of [this school] and Deaf Culture. I'm notable to commit many hours to events outside of workwhich I know would enhance my skills."

Discussion

The purpose of this investigation was to identify gen-eral factors that motivate and demotivate hearing adultlearners of ASL. No effort was made to identify when

the sign language learning experiences occurred, sincethe study was not meant to evaluate curriculum or in-structional effectiveness. While some respondents indi-cated their experiences were more recent, others re-sponded that the sources of motivation or demotivation

were experienced as "long as 10 or 15 years earlier.Regardless of when the learning experience occurred,however, the perceptions of the respondents representtheir reflections on their learning experiences, andthese factors should be considered when planning andevaluating ASL—teacher training programs.

The fact that 143 of the 403 positive comments(35.5%) collected pertained to professionals wanting tobe the best they can be in their positions attests to anintrinsic motivation that could likely be enhanced byknowledgeable and sensitive ASL instructors who rec-ognize the professional development potential withintheir power. Similarly, a love for learning ASL asa unique language and the desire for effective socialinteractions are motivating forces that teachers maycapitalize on in both introductory and advanced ASLcourses. These factors are likely generalizable to otheracademic environments.

Two of the categories of factors that negativelyaffect learning of ASL identified in this study (work-load/scheduling and school expectations) are relatedstrongly to school management and policy. Faculty andstaff respondents felt their workload and schedule con-flicts discouraged them from pursuing ASL skills de-velopment as much as they would like. Two out of every10 comments related to these issues, indicating a needfor administrators in schools to examine possible waysto ameliorate such concern.

As for the school's policy, 11.6% of the negativecomments related to the established levels of profi-ciency in ASL for tenure and promotion. On the otherhand, 14.6% of the positive comments about being mo-tivated pertained to school policy. The policies in thisschool were implemented by vote of the faculty andwere relatively new at the time the study was con-ducted. Further investigation of attitudinal changeover time may provide insight into the role of policy inthis complex interplay of intrinsic and extrinsic forces.

In this investigation, aspects of sign languagecourses accounted for 18.8% of the negative com-ments, and 15.6% were related to sign language in-struction. Thus, more than one third of all commentsabout being less motivated pertained to the direct signlanguage learning experience. Gardner and Tremblay(1994) reviewed many studies on motivation and sec-ond language acquisition in general, summarizing that

Dow



arch 2022


motivation involves a desire to learn the material andfavorable attitude associated with learning the material.With regard to this study, additional research on per-ceptions of instruction and curriculum is clearlyneeded. ASL teacher training personnel may also ben-efit from the research findings in studies with foreignlanguage teachers. For example, Moskowitz (1976)concluded from her study that "outstanding teachersused a number of indirect behaviors, such as praising,joking, and personalizing questions, significantly moredirect behaviors, such as directing drills and criticizingstudent behaviors, significantly less than typical teach-ers" (p. 135). The comments from the respondents inthis study support these suggestions.

In addition to the logistical and curriculum/teach-ing clusters, a third cluster of factors having a negativeimpact on motivation related to the attitudes of self andthe attitudes of others, accounting for three out of ev-ery 10 of the negative comments. The qualitative datain this study indicate that such attitudes play an im-portant role in motivation and possibly affect achieve-ment in ASL courses. Additional research on the atti-tudinal dimensions of deaf-hearing relationships in thecontext of ASL learning is warranted. In some cases,the "philosophy" of an ASL curriculum might not beclearly communicated. We agree with McKee andMcKee (1992), for example, who write that "sincecode-switching and mixing is a sociolinguistic charac-teristic of the Deaf community (Cokely 1984, Lucas &Valli 1989), perhaps it needs to be explicitly defined assuch in the ASL classroom, in order to lessen teachers'and students' sense of frustration that something is'wrong' when they experience code-switching in hear-ing-Deaf encounters" (p. 154). Moreover, as Schu-mann (1976) explains, social solidarity and, conse-quently, a good language learning situation, will existwhen the second language learning group is neitherdominant nor subordinate to the target language group.

Beyond the categorizing of motivational factorsand the study of patterns across categories, severalthemes emerged regarding the relationship betweenmotivation and the teaching and learning of ASL. Inthe concluding section of this article, we describe thesethemes and offer recommendations for further re-search.

First, in an academic environment such as that

studied in this investigation, there may be a complexinteraction of motivational factors people experiencewith regard to learning ASL as a second language. Thepolitics of culture and language, personal as well asprofessional values and goals, the extrinsic rewards ofsalary increments, promotion, and tenure, and otherforces present conflict in some learners. For example,several respondents described a tone of increasinglypolitical and confrontational activism on campus re-garding the attainment of sign skills, which in somecases proved motivating and, in others, demotivating.These conditions may be exacerbated by the establish-ment of a policy that relates attainment of sign lan-guage proficiency to professional advancement. Fur-ther research is recommended to determine the long-term impact of these trends on motivation to learn signlanguage, particularly within professional contexts.

A second theme involves the application of pre-scriptive guidelines to professional development expec-tations for college faculty. While college faculty tradi-tionally have been expected to meet certain criteria forpromotion and tenure, they have also been granted acertain amount of leeway regarding individual inter-

• pretations and expressions of these criteria. The signlanguage policy, however, recommends specific levelsof proficiency using a single assessment tool. Some fac-ulty resist these policies because they may perceivethem as restricting academic freedom. What is the rela- "tionship between required levels of proficiency in ASLand academic freedom? How do these policies affectthe traditions of the university culture? These andother questions deserve further investigation.

Still another theme suggested by the data is theshifting definition of individual empowerment and re-sponsibility. Prior to the establishment of college stan-dards for sign language, faculty had both the power todefine the parameters of their skill development andthe responsibility to attain appropriate levels of skill.The college's establishment of expectations for signlanguage proficiency shifted some power from individ-ual faculty to the college. At the same time, the respon-sibility for faculty development shifted from primarilya faculty-centered responsibility to a shared responsi-bility between the college and the individual employee.Faced with a new set of professional demands that arecritical to career development, faculty have begun to

Dow



arch 2022


hold the college accountable for appropriate pro-fessional development opportunities. They are de-manding specific topics in sign language and Deaf cul-ture and have become both more informed of theirneeds and more vocal about their rights as learners. Inresponse, there have been significant changes in thestructure and curriculum of sign language courses atthe college. Other schools may wish to investigate theimplications of school policies for empowerment andtheir relationship to proficiency in ASL.

In summary, a variety of motivational factors comeinto play that may influence the learning of ASL. Un-derstanding the differences in patterns of motivationsamong faculty and staff grouped by professional types,as well as the social, political, cultural, and otherthemes that emerge and influence learning, may behelpful in developing a strongly motivated learningcommunity as well as in guiding course developmentand ASL teacher training. The results of this study in-dicate that institutional policy, ASL teachers, and col-legial interactions all have the potential to influence themotivation of adult learners. In particular, ASL teach-ers have the challenge of ameliorating fear, embar-rassment, and other emotions and attitudes that mayinterfere with learning. To enhance learning of ASL,schools and other professional settings where sign lan-guage fluency is an expectation of employment woulddo well to consider the institutional, political, curricu-lar, and individual conditions that motivate adultlearners.

Note

1. The use of the uppercase "Deaf" is generally used to referto a group of deaf people who share a language—American Sign

Language—and a culture, while die lowercase " d e a f refers tothe audiologicaJ condition of not hearing (Padden & Humphries,1988; Woodward, 1972).

References

Cokely, D. (1984). Foreigner talk & learner's grammar. The Re-flector, 8, 23-30.

Flanagan, J. C (1954). The critical incident technique. Psycho-logical Bulletin, 51, 327-355.

Gardner, R. C , & Tremblay, P. F. (1994). On motivation, re-search agendas, and theoretical frameworks. Modern Lan-guage Journal, 78, 359-368.

Lang, H. G., Dowaliby, F. J., & Anderson, H. P. (1994). Criticalteaching incidents: Recollections of deaf college students.American Annals of the Deaf, 139(2), 119-127.

Lang, H. G., Foster, S. B., Gustina, D. E., Mowl, G. E., & Liu,Y. (1996). Motivational and attitudinal orientations in learn-ing American Sign Language. Journal of Deaf Studies andDeaf Education, 1(2), 137-144.

Lang, H. Q , McKee, B. G., & Conner, K. N. (1993). Character-istics of effective teachers: A descriptive analysis of the per-ceptions of faculty and deaf college students. American An-nals of the Deaf, 138(3), 252-259.

Lucas, C , & Valli, C. (1989). Language contact in the AmericanDeaf community. In C Lucas (Ed.), The sociolinguisttcs of theDeaf community (pp. 11-40). San Diego: Academic Press.

McKee, R. L., & McKee, D. (1992). What's so hard about learn-ing ASL? Students' & teachers' perceptions. Sign LanguageStudtes, 75, 129-155.

Moskowitz, G. (1976). The classroom interaction of outstandingforeign language teachers. Foreign Language Annals, 9,135-137.

Padden, C , & Humphries, T. (1988). Deaf in America: Voices froma culture. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Schumann, J. H. (1976). Social distance as a factor in second lan-guage acquisition. Language Learning, 26(1), 135—143.

Woodward, J. (1972). Implications for sociolinguistics researchamong the deaf. Sign Language Studies, 1, 1—7.

Dow



arch 2022

Motivational Factors in Learning American Sign Language

Documents

Transcript of Motivational Factors in Learning American Sign Language