ISSN 1343-3105
A n n u a l
R e v i e wo fAnnual Review
ofEnglish Learning and Teaching

E n g l i s h
L e a r n i n g

No. 25a n d
Te a c h i n g

Article:Motivation and Participation of Learners in an Online Lingua Franca Exchange

No.25
November 30, 2020

Tamao ARAKI

1

Instructions for Contributors ・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・

21

・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・

The
JACET
Kyushu-Okinawa
Chapter

The JACET Kyushu-Okinawa Chapter
November 30, 2020

－ Article －Motivation and Participation of Learners in an Online Lingua Franca Exchange
Tamao ARAKI
University of Miyazaki
E-mail: taraki@cc.miyazaki-u.ac.jp
Abstract
This study examined the motivation of Japanese learners of English who participated in an
online lingua franca exchange and also explored the possible interrelations of their motivationand online participation/environment during the eleven-week data collection period of theexchange. The Complex Dynamic Systems Theory was employed as the theoretical frameworkof the study. Pre and post states of their motivation were measured in relation to ideal L2 self
and anxiety by using a 13-item questionnaire, followed by a pre-post comparison conductedusing paired-samples t-tests. Forum replies written by the Japanese participants were measured
quantitatively in terms of word count, number of posts, and to whom the replies had been
written. The pre-post comparisons showed a reduced anxiety and an increased ideal L2 selfof the participants. The correlations between the participants’ replies and their motivation
revealed that their participation in the online exchange and the online environment thatsurrounded the learner may have contributed to their reduced anxiety. The reduced anxiety
might also have facilitated further participation of learners. Their participation was also
correlated with an increase in ideal L2 self; this suggests that the authentic use of English
could have contributed to the clarification of their image of themselves as L2 users.
Keywords: online exchange, lingua franca, motivation, participation, asynchronous computermediated communication
Introduction
The Internet has enabled language teachers to transform their classrooms into internationaland multicultural encounters in an authentic environment where learners are able to learn alanguage with beneficial and unique learning experiences (Belz & Thorne, 2005; Lewis &O’Dowd, 2016a; O’Dowd, 2007; Warschauer & Kern, 2000). Traditionally, the bilingualbicultural exchange has been the dominant model of such online exchanges (O’Dowd, 2016,p. 295). Learners from one linguistic/cultural background are paired with learners fromanother background and teach their native languages to each other (O’Dowd, 2016; O’Rourke,2007).
On the other hand, there is an increasing number of online exchanges conducted inanother format, where L2 learner participants from multiple countries learn a single second
language as a lingua franca, without native speakers of that language involved (Lewis &O’Dowd, 2016b). This approach has been increasing, partly because there are not “enough－1－

classes of ‘native speakers’” if we want to “provide sufficient partnership for classes based incountries of less commonly spoken languages” adopting the bilingual-bicultural model for all
exchanges (O’Dowd, 2016, p. 296).
Given the increasing trend of the latter type at the practice level (O’Dowd, 2016), I
introduce a new term online lingua franca exchange for the latter type of online exchange,
adapting a nearly identical term lingua franca exchange mentioned, but not necessarily
treated as a target of investigation, by O’Dowd (2016, p. 296). The new category is needed,firstly because exchanges of this type are often different from those of the bilingual-biculturalmodel in their partnering, in that the former often have more than two parties involved in theexchange while the latter typically allow only two parties and the participants are often native
speakers of the target language learned by the other party (O’Rourke, 2007; O’Dowd, 2013).
Secondly, partly because of the geographical multiplicity of parties involved and the more
limited time frame shared among them due to it, asynchronous computer-mediatedcommunication (ACMC) such as electronic forums is more widely used in this type of
exchange than the bilingual-bicultural exchanges, in which synchronous computer-mediatedcommunication (SCMC), especially video conferencing, is increasingly prevalent (O’Dowd,2016). Thirdly but not the least, using a language as a lingua franca has become more
ubiquitous than ever in this globalizing world, especially so in the case of English as a lingua
franca (ELF), arguably adding potential to the educational utility of this type of exchange(O’Dowd, 2016; Seidlhofer, 2009).
However, there has been far less research conducted on the outcomes of such online
lingua franca exchanges than those done on bilingual-bicultural exchanges (Lewis & O’Dowd,
2016b; O’Dowd, 2016). This study, therefore, examined an online exchange program thatwas conducted collaboratively using electronic forums (an ACMC tool) in university level
EFL classrooms from four countries (two Asian, one Middle Eastern, and one European) interms of the learners’ participation in forums, their L2 motivation, and the interrelation
between them.
Theoretical Framework
The Complex Dynamic Systems Theory (CDST) was employed as the theoreticalframework of this study and the design of the online exchange program from which the data
was collected (Larsen-Freeman & Cameron, 2008; Larsen-Freeman, 2012; Reinhardt, 2012).
Traditionally, research on language learning in the context of computer-mediatedcommunication (CMC) was often done from the viewpoint of the interactionist approaches,
which see learning as occurring in an interaction where a learner has a negotiation of meaning
with their interlocutor (a native speaker in many cases), leading to a meaningful L2 input for
the learner (Long, 1983). The main constructs of these approaches are input, feedback,noticing, and output, mostly focusing on one’s internal process or that in the brain, hence it isa theory of a cognitive orientation (Reinhardt, 2012). On the other hand, online exchanges－2－have often been researched from socio-cognitive approaches (Atkinson, 2002; Reinhardt,2012). These approaches see learning as occurring in a context which mediates one’s learning(Lantolf & Thorne, 2006; Lave & Wenger, 1991; van Lier, 2000). Learning is consideredinseparable from various ecological resources including the technological tools that surroundthem affording learning itself (van Lier, 2000). Though socio-cognitive approaches andtheories of cognitive orientation are often considered theoretically incommensurable(Reinhardt, 2012), CDST is claimed to offer a perspective that transcends the theoretical gap(Reinhardt, 2012), positing complex adaptive systems, which can be regarded as constituting
one’s ecology in one sense, but also as one that comprises of multiple agents not onlyinteracting with each other but co-adapting to each other (The “Five Graces Group,” 2009;
Larsen-Freeman & Cameron, 2008).
CDST is thus expected to provide a more comprehensive perspective for theconceptualization of learning in online lingua franca exchange, where no party provides anabsolute model as a native speaker of a target language, unlike interactionist situations (Long,
1983), and instead learning is expected to occur when participants interact with or co-adapt
to each other. One’s participation such as sending a post addressing someone can incur theaddressee’s response to the sender or someone else. Mutuality and network would also serveas the basis for various types of learning. Both at the interpersonal and intrapersonal levels,for example, there is not only one-way causation from one’s motivation to one’s writing
behavior, but also consequence of one’s writing a post or the writing behavior itself might
affect one’s motivation (de Bot & Larsen-Freeman, 2011, p. 10).
Although L2 motivation is originated in a different research tradition than CDST,
integrative theorization has recently been attempted so that L2 motivation research (Dörnyei’s
L2 Motivational Self System) and CDST are able to share the same theoretical perspectives(Dörnyei, 2009b; The “Five Graces Group,” 2009). Accordingly, in the present study, theinterrelation between learners’ participation, environment, and their motivation was examinedby employing the framework of CDST.
Literature Review
Learner Motivation in CMC
Many studies have been conducted to reveal motivational aspects of L2 learners using
various types of CMC with a focus on the medium. However, most of them investigated L2classrooms where the learners share the same geographical location, similar cultural
backgrounds, and sometimes even the same L1 (Arnold, 2007; Poza, 2011; Stockwell, 2013;
Ushida, 2005; Warschauer, 1996). The implications of these studies in CMC utility were often
positive but sometimes mixed. Warschauer (1996) conducted a questionnaire survey on
CMC-related motivation of L2 learners (n = 167) with questions composed by himself, but
not resorting to the constructs of existing L2 motivational theories. The learners were foundto be motivated by CMC as used in their classrooms (Warschauer, 1996). Using a questionnaire－3－compiled from Foreign Language Classroom Anxiety Scale (FLCAS) (Horwitz, Horwitz, &Cope, 1986), Arnold (2007) investigated whether face-to-face, SCMC (chat), and ACMC
(forum) environments have a long-term effect on communication apprehension and also
whether different CMC environments have different effects on communication apprehensionof the participants (n = 56), whose anxiety level was moderate or low. A time effect was foundacross all the three environments but no significant difference in effect was seen among thethree (Arnold, 2007). On the other hand, Poza (2011) found a positive time effect of an
ACMC tool (a voice board system called ‘Wimba’) on the reduction of anxiety of L2 learners(n = 46) using a questionnaire compiled from several batteries of questions including FLCAS.
She attributed the reduced anxiety of the learners to “the elimination of the time pressure of
the classroom and the opportunity to edit” their audio products, which she assumed was
facilitated by the ACMC tool (Poza, 2011, p. 51).
Online Exchanges as Motivational Interventions
In contrast with the research on the effects of CMC in terms of its medium, fewer studies
have been conducted on the effects of online exchanges between learners from different
countries with different linguistic and/or cultural backgrounds on their motivation in terms of
the psychological constructs upon which L2 motivational theory is based.
Jauregi, de Graff, van den Bergh, and Kriz (2012) examined learners’ motivationalchanges through a bilingual-bicultural exchange which had an intercultural video-web
communication (SCMC) project as one of its components conducted between 36 Czech
foreign language learners of Dutch and 35 Dutch pre-service language teachers. They
measured learners’ motivational change using a weekly questionnaire during the 10-weekproject. The project also included three weekly native-speaker-non-native-speaker (NSNNS) video-web communication sessions, each of which lasted 30 minutes. Although theyreported that the project had a positive impact on the learners’ motivation, their conclusion
was based on the individual question items rather than on the comparison of subscale scoresof motivational constructs proposed in L2 motivational research.
Freiermuth and Huang (2012) employed a qualitative approach to L2 motivation in an
online lingua franca exchange. They measured the motivation of 20 Japanese students ofEnglish as a foreign language (EFL) who chatted electronically in English with 19 Taiwanese
EFL students. A 60-minute NNS-NNS chat session (SCMC) between the two groups washeld once. A qualitative analysis of the responses collected from the participants from bothgroups after the session revealed that Task Attractiveness, Task Innovativeness, andWillingness to Communicate were evident in their comments on the session.
These two studies have demonstrated positive motivational effects of online exchanges
that utilized SCMC, which could constitute a very different ecology to that of ACMC (Arnold,
2007; Kern, 2014). These two studies did not use subscale scores of psychological constructs
based on existing L2 motivational theories, either, leaving room for improvement in terms of－4－

the quantitative measurements of those constructs.
Interventions Based on L2 Motivation Research
Since Crooks and Schmidt’s (1991) proposal, which noted the need for L2 motivational
studies that yield more classroom pedagogical implications than they used to, an increasing
number of theoretical and empirical studies have examined situational aspects of learnermotivation (Dörnyei & Ushioda, 2010). It was in this context that Dörnyei’s L2 Motivational
Self System was proposed as a framework that explains not only the trait-like motivational
properties that Gardner’s socio-educational model tried to capture (Gardner, 1985; Gardner &Lambert, 1972), but also more situational processes dependent on teaching and learning
experiences in L2 classrooms (Dörnyei, 2005; 2009a).
Dörnyei’s framework thus has led to research on motivating language learners (Dörnyei,
2009a, p. 32; Guilloteaux & Dörnyei, 2008; Sugita McEown & Takeuchi, 2014; Ueki &Takeuchi, 2012; Lamb, 2017). Ueki and Takeuchi (2012) conducted a survey study to validate
Dörnyei’s L2 Motivational Self System in the Japan’s context with 151 Japanese first-year
university students. They reported that they successfully validated the system and noted that
“Japanese learners’ L2 motivation is mainly mediated by their Ideal L2 selves,” suggestingthat a clearer image about their future selves is more likely to lead to their motivated learning
behaviors in the Japanese context (Ueki & Takeuchi, 2012, p. 14). They also found that a“perceived amount of information” about their future selves served to enhance the ideal L2
self, in turn leading to motivated learning behaviors (p. 13).
Research Questions (RQs)
Given the paucity of motivational studies on online lingua franca exchanges, as well as
research and educational imperatives to shed light on the dynamic process of motivationalchange, learner participation, and the online environment that surrounds the learner in suchan exchange, the present study employed a long-term online lingua franca exchange among
L2 learners of English from different parts of the world. The study focused primarily on
Japanese participants, their participation, the environment in the online forums, and theirmotivational changes. Accordingly, the present study was guided by the following researchquestions:
RQ1.	What kind of change in learner motivation can result from an online lingua franca
exchange?
RQ2.	Is there any relationship between learner participation, the online environment thatsurrounds the learner, and their motivation? If there is, how are they related?

－5－

Method
Online Exchange Project and Participants
A semi-experimental EFL online exchange with multi-national participants was
conducted in the context of a regular English course for nursing students at a national
university in Japan.1 The aims of the course included (a) to increase one’s English writing
skills and literacy, (b) to obtain a deeper understanding of different cultures, and (c) toincrease one’s familiarity with English expressions related to nursing. In practice, there wasa consensus among the teaching staff involved in this part of the English curriculum to focus
on (a) and (b) in implementing this course at that time. Hence, online exchange was selected
as the main activity of the course.
The participants of the online exchange were 159 undergraduate nursing students fromfour countries, with 39, 38, 23, and 59 participants from Taiwan, Spain, Turkey, and Japan,
respectively. The participants joined an online exchange program from October 2016 until
mid-January 2017. Only the Japanese students’ data were collected and analyzed focusing on
motivational change and the interrelation between the motivational change and learners’
participation under the same classroom settings, as the classrooms in the other countries had
different class interventions, which was fully respected for the sake of ecological validity ineach context in this study.
The participants of this study were all first-year students at a Japanese national university
who majored in nursing (55 females and 4 males). They took this required weekly English
course, and most of the class period was spent for this online exchange. They were all L2
learners of English and did not take any English lessons outside the university. There were
two teachers who taught this course, in which one of them (the author, male) mainly managed
and taught the course while the other (female) assisted him in providing occasional individual
tutoring, including technical support, to the participants. A 53-item mock proficiency test
modeled on the TOEIC Bridge was conducted at the beginning of the semester to measure thebase proficiency of the Japanese participants. Cronbach’s alpha for the entire mock test was.79, indicating that the overall reliability thereof was acceptable (Larson-Hall, 2010). The
participants’ results showed that their average proficiency was equivalent to TOEIC Bridge
140, TOEIC 390, or lower CEFR A2.
A complete set of proficiency test scores and motivational measurement scores was
obtained from 51 of the 59 Japanese participants (48 females and 3 males) whose data wasused in the analysis.2
Medium for Exchange: Moodle Forums
Moodle forum, an ACMC tool, was employed as the medium throughout the exchange.
The four-month period of the exchange was divided into six stages; a Moodle forum was
assigned to each stage. Stages 1 to 6 were opened in a series at one- or two-week intervals
according to the schedule (Figure 1). The participants were encouraged to send one initial－6－

post and at least one reply during each stage (i.e., each forum). They were instructed to workon these stages consecutively, starting with Self-introduction and Our Student Life (Stage 1),
moving on to Our Towns and Cities (Stage 2), Culture (Stage 4), Health Care / Nursing(Stage 5), and ending with Students’ Views and Discussion (Stage 6). They were also allowed
to use pictures as well as text in their posts.

Figure 1. Schedule of the online exchange and the data collection period.

The data collection period was from Weeks 1 through 11, with the remaining several
weeks cut from the entire duration of the exchange, because the participation of the Japanese
students after this period varied greatly due to the two-week winter break that followed it.
Coursework and Evaluation
The Japanese participants attended the course’s regular weekly meetings at a computerlab. At the beginning of every weekly meeting, a brief introduction of the latest stage (approx.
5 min), language advice for the stage (approx. 5 min), and additional instructions whennecessary (approx. 5–15 min) were delivered before the students worked on the forum writing
activity (approx. 70 min). During the writing activity, the teachers played a role of facilitator,
keeping autonomy for the students, who can choose a specific topic of their own (a generaltheme such as “culture” was already given) and to whom they wrote. They could also talk tofellow students for exchanging ideas about their writing. Most of the time, however, thestudents were busy writing and researching on a topic with a desktop PC silently and in aconcentrated manner. The students were also allowed to work on writing outside of class at
the computer lab and some of them did so occasionally but the majority mainly worked on theexchange during the weekly class sessions.
The Japanese participants were evaluated primarily on the posts they produced in terms－7－

of word count and quality. They were required to create an initial post and at least one reply
to another participant’s initial post, which was a basic minimal requirement that was sharedby the classrooms in the other countries. In the classroom in Japan, a specific evaluation
policy was presented that 55% of the final grade was based on the quantity and quality of theirwriting to encourage the students to demonstrate their writing skills and increase the occasionsof learning through participation.3
Compilation and Administration of the Questionnaire
To determine the time effect of the students’ participation on their motivation, a pre andpost questionnaire was conducted. Based on the literature on the constructs of the ideal L2
self and anxiety (Dörnyei & Ushioda, 2010; Taguchi, Magid, & Papi, 2009), a 13-item
questionnaire was compiled. Two constructs, ideal L2 self and anxiety, were hypotheticallyselected based on their relevance to the asynchronous online exchange, where learners are
expected to use an L2 in an authentic environment arguably similar to the L2 use in their
future but with less pressure in terms of time and face-to-face contacts (Kern, 2014; Poza,
2011; Ueki & Takeuchi, 2012). Some of the question items were modified slightly to reflect
the participants’ educational and classroom contexts (see Appendix for the items used). A
six-point Likert scale was employed to assess the questions. The questionnaire wasadministered during the class meetings on Week 2 and Week 11 (Figure 1).
The participants gave consent to have their questionnaire responses used for the present
study and all their forum messages throughout the exchange (i.e., Week 1 to 11) saved andused for research after anonymization. As stated below, the saved posts served as data for thequantitative analysis of the learners’ participation in this study.
Operationalizing Learner Online Participation and Their Online Environments
Each participant’s online participation in the exchange was operationalized in relation to
two aspects of their writing: first, the number of replies sent by the participant, and second,
the total word count of the posts sent by the participant throughout the data collection period.
They are indexes of observable learner behaviors. Those behaviors could be motivatedpsychologically. Or more hypothetically, they could create opportunities for clarification of
their own future L2 self image (Dörnyei, 2009a; Ueki & Takeuchi, 2012). Though these
theoretical possibilities will not be proven in this study, the existence of such possibilities
could be explored in the correlational analysis of this study.
In addition, the number of replies the participants received and the word count of those
replies were tallied as a quantitative approximation of the learner’s online environment.
Again, they are indexes of observable behaviors that surrounds a learner, which are different
from a learner’s perception of them. However, the perception could be conditioned by them.
The intensity of received replies indexed by number and length could enter into a causal
relation with learner motivation if mediated by their perception of them. The possibility of－8－such a relation was explored from the correlational analyses on those indexes of received
posts and motivation.
These quantifications were only conducted on their replies and not on their initial posts(Figure 2). As noted previously, the participants were encouraged to write and send no morethan one initial post at each stage with 100–200 words depending on the stage, a minimum
word count recommended by the instructor. Furthermore, they were encouraged to write atleast one reply, but were recommended to write more if they wanted to. There was no minimum
word count set for replies. Because of this relative flexibility in replies accorded to theparticipants, I focused on the replies in analysis based on the assumption that the number andlength of replies would reflect the amount and intensity of their writing behaviors, which inturn could be related to motivation.
It is also noteworthy that a reply was addressed to a particular post of a particularparticipant, while an initial post was addressed to everyone in the exchange and not to aparticular participant (Figure 2).

Figure 2. An initial post and replies in the exchange (Moodle forum).

In several exchanges previously held with different groups of students, and in thisexchange as well, the participants were often observed to feel excited when they received areply from another participant from another country and feel anxious about replies when they
did not receive any after they posted their own initial writings. Consequently, I regarded thereplies received as constituting the environment of each participant in a significant way in thisstudy.
－9－

Results
Overall Participation and Interaction in the Online Exchange
The 159 participants from the four countries sent a total of 2,741 posts in the exchanges
during the data collection period—an average of 17.2 posts (SD = 8.76) or 1,332 words (SD= 703) per participant.
The targeted group of Japanese participants (n = 51) sent an average number of 15.6
posts (SD = 7.41) or 1,055 words (SD = 372.8) per participant.
Online Participation and Environments of the Japanese Participants
The Japanese participants (n = 51) sent an average of 10.7 replies (SD = 7.26) to theother participants; the minimum and maximum number of replies were 1 and 32, respectively.
They received an average of 11.6 replies (SD = 5.96) from the other participants; the minimum
and maximum were 3 and 32, respectively. They wrote an average of 370.5 words (SD =280.08) in their replies; the minimum was 22 and the maximum was 1,471. The average total
word count of all the replies that Japanese participants received was 475.3 words (SD =240.04).
Motivation and Motivational Change of the Participants
Cronbach’s alpha was computed for each of the two latent variables in the questionnaire;the results revealed that the reliability of both the pre-data (ideal L2 self α = .90; anxiety α =.91) and post data (ideal L2self α = .90; anxiety α = .90) was good.
The subscale score for each latent variable, namely, ideal L2 self and anxiety was also
calculated for the pre and the post data sets by averaging the scores of the items of eachvariable (eight and five items for ideal L2 self and anxiety, respectively). Subsequently, thesubscale scores of all the individual participants (n = 51) were averaged to produce a mean
subscale score of the Japanese group for each variable for the pre and post data sets.
A paired-samples t-test was conducted to compare the mean subscale scores of the preand post datasets for each of the two variables by using Bonferroni adjusted alpha levels of.025 per test (.05/2). The results showed a significant increase and significant decrease of themean subscale scores of ideal L2 self and anxiety, respectively (Table 1).
Table 1Time Effects of Online Exchange on Learner Motivation (ideal L2 self and anxiety)n
Ideal L2 Self
Anxiety

51
51

Pre
M (SD)
2.41 (0.74)
4.63 (1.20)

Post
M (SD)
2.64 (0.76)
4.26 (1.11)

Note. * <.025 after Bonferroni adjustments.

－10－

Diff.

t(50)

p

Cohen’s
d

0.23
−0.37

−2.52
2.74

.015*
.009*

−.30
.31

Correlations Among Motivation, Participation, and the Environment
The interrelation of learner motivation/motivational change, their online participation,and online environment by writing was examined by conducting correlation analyses.4
Correlations among the motivational variables. Some moderate correlations between
the two different variables, ideal L2 self and anxiety, were found in pre-post differences andthe post phase. First, the pre-post difference in ideal L2 self was negatively correlated withthat in anxiety with a medium effect size (r = −.40, p = .004). Second, in the post phase, ideal
L2 self on the one hand and anxiety (r = −.38, p = .006) and the pre-post difference in anxiety(r = −.30, p = .034) on the other hand were negatively correlated with a medium or small
size-effect (Table 2).
Moderate or strong correlations were also found between the pre and the post phase of
the same motivational variables, that is, between the pre and post of ideal L2 self (r = .63, p< .001) and between the pre and post of anxiety (r = .65, p < .001).
Table 2
Correlations between the Learner Motivational Variables
Pre
Pre
Post
Pre-Post
Difference

IL2S
Anx
IL2S
Anx
IL2S
Anx

IL2S
—

Post
Anx
−.14
—

IL2S
.63***
−.11
—

Anx
−.11
.65***−.38**—

Pre-Post Difference
IL2S
Anx−.40**.04.03−.49***.46***
−.30*
−.32*
.34*
—
−.40**—

Note. IL2S = ideal L2 self; Anx = anxiety. * p < .05. ** p < .01. *** p < .001.

On the other hand, correlation was not found between the two different motivationalvariables at the pre-phase (r = −.14, p = .334), nor between the pre-phase on the one hand andthe post phase (Pre IL2S − Post Anx: r = −.11, p = .435; Pre Anx − Post IL2S: r = −.11, p =.437) or the pre-post difference (Pre IL2S − Pre-Post Diff. Anx: r = .04, p = .766; Pre Anx −Pre-Post Diff. IL2S: r = .03, p = .859) on the other hand. This indicates that, as far as the ideal
L2 self and anxiety are concerned, throughout the data collection period, the initial state of
the participants’ motivation did not directly influence the motivational changes or the end
state of the participants’ motivation across different motivational variables, but just within thesame variable.
Correlations between motivation and learner participation/environment. There
were weak correlations between the motivational variables, on the one hand, and the learners’
online participation and their online environment, on the other. The anxiety scores at the post
phase were negatively correlated with participation variables such as the number of sent
replies (r = −.33, p = .017) and total word count of sent replies (r = −.37, p = .007), as well－11－

as with environmental variables such as number of received replies (r = −.35, p = .013) andtotal word count of received replies (r = −.35, p = .013) (Table 3).
Table 3
Correlations between Learner Motivational Variables and the Variables Related to
Learner Participation and Environment

Pre
Post
Pre-Post
Difference

IL2S
Anx
IL2S
Anx
IL2S
Anx

Sent replies
Number of
Total word
replies
count
−.10
−.16
−.24
−.30*
.07
.10
−.33*
−.37**
.20
.30*
−.09
−.05

Received replies
Number of
Total word
replies
count
−.07
−.06
−.24
−.22
.13
.15
−.35*
−.35*
.23
.25
−.10
−.12

Note. IL2S = ideal L2 self; Anx = anxiety. * p < .05. ** p < .01.

There was also a weak negative correlation between the anxiety score at the pre-phaseand the total word count of sent replies (r = −.30, p = .031). In addition, weak negative
correlations were also found between the post-anxiety score and the other participation/
environmental variables (Post Anx − Sent Replies Num.: r = −.33, p = .017; Post Anx − Sent
Replies TWC: r = −37, p = .007; Post Anx − Rcvd. Replies Num.: r = −.35, p = .013; Post Anx− Rcvd. Replies TWC: r = −.35, p = .013). However, correlation between the pre-postdifference in the anxiety score and the participation/environmental variables was not detected(Table 3).
Regarding the correlation between ideal L2 self and learner participation/environment,
there was one weak positive correlation between the pre-post difference in ideal L2 self andthe total word count of sent replies (r = .30, p = .033) (Table 3).
Correlations between learner participation and environment. Strong positive
correlations were found among the participation and environmental variables; these included
those between the number of sent replies and the number of received replies (r = .78, p <.001), and between the total word count of sent replies and the total word count of received
replies (r = .64, p < .001).
Discussion
The findings of this study suggest that the online lingua franca exchange resulted inchanges in learner motivation, particularly anxiety. They also suggested that the magnitude oflearners’ online participation and that of received replies contributed to the process of theirmotivational change. These findings are discussed in relation to the two research questions of
the study.

－12－Research Question 1
In relation to the first research question, which questioned whether changes in learnermotivation can be produced in an online lingua franca exchange, the ideal L2 self increased
and anxiety decreased significantly, though each of these two trends may have emerged rather
independently from each other (Dewaele & MacIntyre, 2014), as a result of learnerparticipation and the interaction between the learner and the environment. Although thedegree of change was modest for both variables, that of anxiety was slightly larger than thatof ideal L2 self (Table 1). Thus, the online lingua franca exchange could lead to a reductionin learners’ anxiety to express themselves, although not necessarily uniformly. Theseexchanges could also be instrumental in ensuring that learners have a clearer self-image ofusing English, possibly due to the authentic environment of exchanges where learners actuallyinteract with other participants from other countries online (Dörnyei, 2009a).
Research Question 2
In relation to the second research question, which examined the relationship between
learner motivation, participation and the online environment, the results revealed that it waspossible that learners’ participation and their online environment in this online exchange
affected their motivation and lessened their anxiety, and also that those motivational changes
may have affected their further participation in turn (de Bot & Larsen-Freeman, 2011).
Participation, environment, and anxiety level. The correlations between the anxiety
score at the post phase, on the one hand, and the number/length of replies sent by learners andreceived from other learners, on the other, during the exchange suggested that the morelearners participated and the more and longer replies they received, the less anxious andnervous they tended to be in the post phase of the exchange (Table 3). The frequency andlength of the replies the participants received could be an index of a welcoming and inclusive
environment, in which, characteristically, more words are exchanged than otherwise; thisenvironment may have contributed to the reduction in their anxiety.
However, it was also found that the degree of anxiety reduction was not directly
proportional to the intensity and density of participation/environment. As shown in Table 3,
the number of sent and received replies did not correlate with the pre-post difference ofanxiety. Lack of covariation in them could be attributed to large SDs of pre and post meananxiety scores in comparison with relatively small SDs of ideal L2 self mean scores (Table1). This might suggest that there was a variety of motivational states regarding anxiety in thecohort of this study and that their change process might have followed different paths.
It is also noteworthy that there was a weak negative correlation between anxiety at the
pre-phase and the total word count of sent replies (Table 3). This indicates that learners withhigh anxiety levels at the outset tended to write less, whereas those with low anxiety levels
tended to write more. This phenomenon could be related to avoidance behaviors that L2
learners with high anxiety levels typically exhibit (Horwitz et al., 1986). However, the overall－13－

reduction of anxiety during the exchange suggests that learners’ actual participation andenvironment contributed to their reduced anxiety, which, in turn, may have increased their
participation resulting in further reduction of anxiety levels. From the viewpoint of CDST, an
adaptive process might have been going on across different systems (anxiety, one’s writing
behavior, and maybe even another participant’s replying to the former), each of which isadapting relative to each other (de Bot & Larsen-Freeman, 2011, p. 11).
Participation, environment, and the ideal L2 self. Learner participation (total word
count of sent replies) correlated with the pre-post difference in ideal L2 self with a small
effect size (Table 3). This indicates a tendency that the more the participants wrote in theirreplies, the greater their gains were in ideal L2 self after their participation. It is difficult toassume that a high level of ideal L2 self facilitated the learners’ participation, because neither
pre nor post scores of ideal L2 self correlated with the participation/environment variables(Table 3). Thus, it is more reasonable to assume that there is a weak but causal relationshipfrom learner participation to an end-point clearer image of their possible selves. It is possible
to assume that the learners’ actual engagement in their online participation gave them ahands-on experience of using their L2, which may have resulted in their clearer self-concepts(Dörnyei, 2009a). CDST again does not exclude this possibility of “motivated” behaviors
affecting motivation (de Bot & Larsen-Freeman, 2011, p. 11).
Interconnectedness of motivation, participation, and the environment. There is thus
an interconnectedness of learner motivation, learner participation, and environment, where
motivation is not only the starting point of one’s behavior but can be changed due to thelearner’s participation or their interaction with the environment, which can in turn affect themultitude of their participation. It indicates that these phenomena constitute a complex
system, whose components are all connected and adapting to each other in a complex way(Larsen-Freeman & Cameron, 2008, p. 38). A qualitative approach is likely to shed more
light on the process, which should be addressed in another study due to spatial reasons.
Pedagogical Implications
The suggested connection between learners’ motivation and their participation in online
exchanges would provide encouragement to teachers who try to increase the learnerparticipation by some strategies such as devising a scaffolding activity to support learnerparticipation. Increased participation could provide learners with more opportunities forclarification and elaboration of the image of their using L2 (Dörnyei, 2009a). Together withthe effect of anxiety reduction, the exchange’s utility in forming one’s ideal L2 self would
have an important implication for Japan’s EFL context, where learners’ motivation isreportedly mediated by ideal L2 self to a large extent and high levels of anxiety affect learnermotivation negatively (Ueki & Takeuchi, 2012, p. 10). Given a tendency of learners with low
proficiency to have a high level of anxiety, the result of this study also indicates that online
lingua franca exchanges could also be an educational option for elementary or lower－14－intermediate learners of English.
Evidence from online lingua franca exchanges such as this study could be informative
when the incorporation of an online exchange into an existing curriculum is considered(O’Dowd, 2011). In countries like Japan, many EFL courses are compulsory subjects. The
ACMC activities of the kind employed in this study are relatively easy to set up in comparison
to SCMC, whose often complicated preparation process makes its implementation challenging(O’Dowd, 2016). Furthermore, the ACMC option is not disadvantaged by time differences
across the world, which also often limits the SCMC option.
Limitations
When interpreting the findings of this study, it is imperative to consider its limitations.
First, a control group was not employed in the study’s design. Therefore, readers are advised
not to interpret the findings as proof of the supremacy of an online lingua franca exchangeover other educational approaches that guide learners’ motivational development. Second,
because a quantitative methodology was employed, only a limited set of variables was isolated
and examined. In order to realize a comprehensive picture of learners’ psychological anddevelopmental processes, it is necessary to utilize a qualitative methodology. Third, it isrecommended that more motivational constructs be examined in a future study so as toachieve a comprehensive understanding of learners’ psychological processes. Finally, thecorrelation analyses conducted on the interrelationship between learners’ participation, theirenvironment, and their motivation were exploratory, necessitating another study to test thoserelations to prove the results of this study.
Conclusion
In this study, learner motivation and motivational change in an online lingua franca
exchange based on two motivational constructs, namely ideal L2 self and anxiety, which
emanate from the literature on L2 motivation research, were examined. Furthermore,correlations between these motivational variables, learners’ participation, and their online
environment in the online exchange were explored. The scores of the two motivational
constructs changed: the ideal L2 self increased and anxiety was reduced, both significantly,
with a small effect size. The correlational analyses between these motivational variables andthe learner participation/environmental indexes indicated that the amount of learnerparticipation and interaction with other participants correlated with a reduction in their anxiety
levels and that the reduced anxiety might have facilitated their participation in turn.
Furthermore, there was a weak correlation between the amount of participation and aheightened clarity of self-image as an L2 user; the former could partially but causally be
responsible for the latter.
These findings also suggest that the framework of CDST provides some insight that canbe used when setting up and developing online lingua franca exchanges for L2 learners of－15－

English. In online lingua franca exchanges, there is often no special group of participants who
are the native speakers of the target language. Multiple interconnectedness among theparticipants from various backgrounds could be a rich source for learning, a possibility thatwas indicated by this study.
Although this study focused on motivation and its interrelation with learners’ participationin an online exchange, linguistic development in these types of activities need to be investigatedin a future study to obtain more implications on the outcomes of online lingua franca exchange.
Notes
1.	This exchange started two years before the 2016–17 exchange (the one featured in this study)
as one of the main contents of the course. No more exchange of this exact type was held after
this 2016–17 exchange due to a change in teacher assignment and curriculum but an exchange
of a different type has been continuing as a part of another course of the university. This
study, however, specifically focuses on the 2016–17 exchange which was conducted in asemi-experimental way to gain implications generalizable to not only the exchange currently
going on at the same university but also other projects of any related type.
2.	The data of eight Japanese participants were omitted because they missed some of the classmeetings when the data collection was conducted, thereby resulting in incomplete data sets
for those participants. I have assumed that these omissions did not cause a bias in thesampling of this study.
3.	The other components of final grade were (a) the initial posts and the first replies at eachstage (whether meeting the quantity requirements) (5%), (b) attendance (15%), (c) final
report (10%), and (d) engagement in the classroom activities (15%).
4.	Even though the learners’ initial proficiency score was not included in the correlations
reported here, in fact, no correlation was found between the learners’ initial proficiency
score, on the one hand, and any index of participation (number of sent replies: r = –.04,
total word count: r = –.09) or of motivation (Pre IL2S: r = –.06, Pre Anx: r = .00; Post
IL2S: r = .12, Post Anx: r = –.07; Pre-Post Diff. IL2S: r = .07, Pre-Post Diff. Anx r = –.07),
on the other (p value was< .05 for all). Although it runs counter to our intuition that one’s
proficiency does not affect one’s writing, I would leave it for further research here justpointing out two possibilities. First, the proficiency test used in this study might not havebeen a valid measure for the participants’ writing ability, as the test only contained items
about listening and reading. Second, the internal quality of learner written language(accuracy, complexity, etc.) might correlate more highly with one’s proficiency than theamount of learner production.
Acknowledgements
I would like to thank Professor Osamu Takeuchi for his comments on an earlier versionof this paper. I am also very grateful to three anonymous reviewers for their valuable comments－16－and suggestions, and to Ms. Kayo Yamamoto, whose close collaboration in conducting theclass reported in this paper was essential for the research. This work was supported by JSPS
KAKENHI Grant Numbers JP17K02932, JP19K00913, JP20K00860.
References
Arnold, N. (2007). Reducing foreign language communication apprehension with computermediated communication: A preliminary study. System, 35(4), 469–486.
Atkinson, D. (2002). Toward a sociocognitive approach to second language acquisition.
Modern Language Journal, 86(4), 525–545.
Belz, J., & Thorne, S. (2005). Internet-mediated intercultural foreign language education.
Boston, MA: Thomson Heinle.
de Bot, K., & Larsen-Freeman, D. (2011). Researching Second Language Development froma Dynamic Systems Theory perspective. In M. H. Verspoor, K. de Bot, and W. Lowie(Eds.), A dynamic approach to second language development (pp. 5–23). Amsterdam,
The Netherlands: John Benjamins.
Dewaele, J. M., & MacIntyre, P. M. (2014). The two faces of Janus? Anxiety and enjoyment
in the foreign language classroom. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching,
4(2), 237–274.
Dörnyei, Z. (2005). The psychology of the language learner: Individual differences in second
language acquisition. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Dörnyei, Z. (2009a). The L2 motivational self system. In Z. Dörnyei and E. Ushioda (Eds.),
Motivation, language identity and the L2 self (pp. 9–42). Bristol, U.K.: Multilingual
Matters.
Dörnyei, Z. (2009b). Individual differences: Interplay of learner characteristics and learning
environment. Language Learning, 59(s1), 230–248.
Dörnyei, Z., & Ushioda, E. (2009). Motivation, language identities and the L2 self: A
theoretical overview. In Z. Dörnyei and E. Ushioda (Eds.), Motivation, language identity and the L2 self (pp. 1–8). Bristol, U.K.: Multilingual Matters.
Dörnyei, Z., & Ushioda, E. (2010). Teaching and researching: Motivation (2nd edition).
London, U.K.: Routledge.
The “Five Graces Group,” (2009). Language is a complex adaptive system: Position paper.
Language Learning, 59(s1), 1–26.
Gardner, R. C. (1985). Social psychology and second language learning: The role of attitudes
and motivation. London, U.K.: Edward Arnold.
Gardner, R. C., & Lambert, W. E. (1972). Attitudes and motivation in second-language learning. Rowley, MA: Newbury House Publishers.
Guilloteaux, M. J., & Dörnyei, Z. (2008). Motivating language learners: A classroom-oriented
investigations of the effects of motivational strategies on student motivation. TESOL
Quarterly, 42(1), 55–77.
－17－

Horwitz, E. K., Horwitz, M. B., Cope, J. (1986). Foreign language classroom anxiety. Modern
Language Journal, 70(2), 125–132.
Jauregi, K., de Graaff, R., van den Bergh, H., & Kriz, M. (2012). Native/non-native speaker
interactions through video-web communication: A clue for enhancing motivation?
Computer Assisted Language Learning, 25(1), 1–19.
Kern, R. (2014). Technology as Pharmakon: The promise and perils of the internet for foreign
language education. Modern Language Journal, 98(1), 340–357.
Lamb, M. (2017). The motivational dimensions of language teaching. Language Teaching,50(3), 301–346.
Lantolf, J. P., & Thorn, S. L. (2006). Sociocultural theory and the genesis of second language
development. Oxford, U.K.: Oxford University Press.
Larsen-Freeman, D., & Cameron, L. (2008). Complex systems and applied linguistics.
Oxford, U.K.: Oxford University Press.
Larsen-Freeman, D. (2012). Complex, dynamic systems: A new transdisciplinary theme forapplied linguistics? Language Teaching, 45(2), 202–214.
Larson-Hall, J. (2010). A guide to doing statistics in second language research using SPSS.
New York, NY: Routledge.
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation.
Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press.
Lewis, T., & O’Dowd, R. (2016a). Introduction to online intercultural exchange and thisvolume. In R. O’Dowd & T. Lewis (Eds.), Online intercultural exchange: Policy, pedagogy, practice (pp. 3–20). New York, NY: Routledge.
Lewis, T., & O’Dowd, R. (2016b). Online intercultural exchange and foreign language
learning: A systematic review. In R. O’Dowd & T. Lewis (Eds.), Online intercultural
exchange: Policy, pedagogy, practice (pp. 21–66). New York, NY: Routledge.
Long, M. (1983). Linguistic and conversational adjustments to non-native speakers. Studies
in Second Language Acquisition, 5(2), 37–63.
O’Dowd, R. (2007). Online intercultural exchange: An introduction for foreign language
teachers. Clevedon, U.K.: Multilingual Matters.
O’Dowd, R. (2011). Online foreign language interaction: Moving from the periphery to thecore of foreign language education? Language Teaching, 44(3), 368–380.
O’Dowd, R. (2013). Telecollaboration and CALL. In M. Thomas, H. Reindeers, & M.
Warschauer (Eds.), Contemporary computer-assisted language learning (pp. 123–141).
London, U.K.: Bloomsbury Academic.
O’Dowd, R. (2016). Emerging trends and new directions in telecollaborative learning.
CALICO Journal, 33(3), 291–310.
O’Rourke, B. (2007). Models of telecollaboration (1): eTandem. In R. O’Dowd (Ed.), Online
intercultural exchange (pp. 41–61). Clevedon, U.K.: Multilingual Matters.
Poza, M. I. C. (2011). The effects of asynchronous computer voice conferencing on L2－18－

learners’ speaking anxiety. The IALLT Journal, 41(1), 33–63.
Reinhardt, J. (2012). Accommodating divergent frameworks in analysis of technologymediated L2 interaction. In M. Dooly & R. O’Dowd (Eds.), Researching online foreign
language interaction and exchange (pp. 11–41). Bern, Germany: Peter Lang.
Seidlhofer, B. (2009). Understanding English as a lingua franca. Oxford, U.K.: Oxford
University Press.
Stockwell, G. (2013) Technology and motivation in English-language teaching and learning.
In E. Ushioda (Ed.), International perspectives on motivation (pp. 156–175).
Basingstoke, U.K.: Palgrave Macmillan.
Sugita McEown, M., & Takeuchi, O. (2014). Motivational strategies in EFL classrooms: how
do teachers impact students’ motivation? Innovation in Language Learning andTeaching, 8(1), 20–38.
Taguchi, T., Magid, M., & Papi, M. (2009). The L2 motivational self system among Japanese,
Chinese and Iranian learners of English: A comparative study. In Z. Dörneyi and E.
Ushioda (Eds.), Motivation, language identity and the L2 self (pp. 66–97). Bristol, U.K.:
Multilingual Matters.
Ueki, M., & Takeuchi, O. (2012). Validating the L2 motivational self system in a Japanese
EFL context: The interplay of L2 motivation, L2 anxiety, self-efficacy, and the perceived
amount of information. Language Education & Technology, 41, 1–22.
Ushida, E. (2005). The role of students’ attitudes and motivation in second language learningin online language courses. CALICO Journal, 23(1), 49–78.
Ushioda, E., & Dörnyei, Z. (2009). Motivation, language identities and the L2 self: A
theoretical overview. In Z. Dörnyei & E. Ushioda (Eds.), Motivation, language identity
and the L2 self (pp.1–8). Bristol, U.K.: Multilingual Matters.
van Lier, L. (2000). From input to affordance: Social-interactive learning from an ecologicalperspective. In J. P. Lantolf (Ed.), Sociocultural theory and second language learning(pp. 245–259). Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press.
Warschauer, M., & Kern, R. (eds.). (2000). Network-based language teaching: Concepts andpractice. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press.
Warschauer, M. (1996). Motivational aspects of using computers for writing andcommunication. In M. Warschauer (Ed.), Telecollaboration in foreign language learning: Proceedings of the Hawai’i symposium (Technical Report #12) (pp. 29–46).
Honolulu, Hawai’i: University of Hawai’i, Second Language Teaching & Curriculum
Center. Retrieved from http://www.lll.hawaii.edu/nflrc/NetWorks/NW1/
Appendix
The items used for the motivational questionnaire for the study and their English translation
are provided in the below. The questionnaire items written in Japanese were used for thesurvey. Six-point Likert scales were used for their response.
－19－

Ideal L2 Self
1.		 私は、将来外国の友達や同僚と英語で話す自分の姿を想像できる。
		 I can imagine myself speaking English with international friends or colleagues.
2.		 私は、自分が外国人と英語で話している状況を想像できる。
		 I can imagine a situation where I am speaking English with foreigners.
3.		 私は、英語を話せる自分を想像できる。
		 I can imagine myself as someone who is able to speak English.
4.		私は、将来自分が海外で生活し、地元の人たちと英語を使って効果的にコミュ
ニケーションをする姿を想像できる。
		I can imagine myself living abroad and using English effectively for communicatingwith the locals.
5.		私は、将来自分が海外で生活し、英語でディスカッションをする自分の姿を想像できる。
		 I can imagine myself living abroad and having a discussion in English.
6.		私は、自分がEメールをスラスラと英語で書いている自分の姿を想像できる。
		 I can imagine myself writing English e-mails fluently.
7.		私は自分が全ての授業を英語で受けるような大学や大学院で学ぶ自分の姿を想像できる。
		I can imagine myself studying in a university where all my courses are taught in English.
8.		私が将来したい事柄には、英語を使うことが必要である。
		 The things I want to do in the future require me to use English.
Anxiety
1.		私は一般的に海外の人たちに英語でメッセージを書いて送る際に、不安を覚える。
		I generally feel anxious when I write and send a message to people in other countries.
2.		私はOCEPの海外の参加者に英語でメッセージを書いて送る際、不安を覚える。
		I feel anxious when I write and send a message to a participant from another country in
OCEP.
3.		 私は海外の人たちに何か質問されたとき、不安を覚える。
		 I feel nervous if someone asks me something in English.
4.		 私は海外の人たちと会う時、不安を覚える。
		 I feel nervous when I meet people from other countries.
5.		 私は英語でものを書くとき、おかしなことを書いていないかと不安を覚える。
		 I feel anxious wondering if I am writing something strange when I write in English.

－20－