Self‐Regulation in SecondLanguage Learning:An Investigation of theKanji‐Learning TaskHeath RoseTrinity College Dublin
Lesley HarbonThe University of Sydney
Abstract: This study investigates how students of the Japanese language regulate thelearning of kanji (Japanese written characters). Skill in reading kanji has an importanteffect on learners’ progress in interpretive reading. Data collected over one yearwere drawn from interviews with 12 students. The study highlighted an inability formany students to control emotions, manage commitments, and control boredom andprocrastination when studying kanji. Moreover, advanced learners were more prone to aloss of self‐regulation due to frustration caused by a lack of progress in learning, or due toself‐criticism over an inability to reach goals. This study raises an understanding ofstruggles faced by language learners and offers pedagogical implications for instructorsto lessen the burden of kanji learning on students.
Key words: Japanese language education, kanji, language learning strategies, learnerautonomy, self‐regulation
IntroductionInterest in learning Japanese grew dramatically in the 1980s and 1990s due to Japan’seconomic success (Bramley&Hanamura, 1998; Samimy&Tabuse, 1992), and therecontinues to be steady growth in the number of students traveling to Japan toundertake university‐level study. The number of foreign students studying in Japangrew from 10,000 in 1983 to 121,812 in 2005 (Guruz, 2008, p. 204), and a recent
initiative by Japan’s Ministry of Educationplans to increase the number of foreignstudents in Japanese universities to 300,000by the year 2020 (Shimauchi, 2009).
Despite this surge in interest in Japaneselanguage and culture, a number of studieshave explored students’ difficulty learningJapanese. Researchers have found thatuniversity students of Japanese reach bench-mark levels of proficiency more slowlythan students of other more commonlytaught languages. For example, Walton(1993) reported that native English–speakingstudents of Japanese require three timesas long to acquire the same level of proficiencyas students of French, German, or Spanish.
It has been hypothesized that students’insufficient knowledge of kanji preventsthem from engaging in interpretive readingas frequently as students of more commonlytaught languages (Dwyer, 1997). It is widelydocumented that Japanese foreign languagelearners struggle with the mastery of kanji,particularly if their first language’s script isalphabetic (see Bourke, 1996; Dwyer, 1997;Everson, 2011). Over the past 20 years, anumber of key studies have examined thelearning strategies students bring to thekanji learning task, including, for example,studies that examined kanji recall (Dwyer,1997; Okita, 1996), strategies students usetomemorize kanji (Bourke, 1996; Lu,Webb,Krus, & Fox, 1999; Toyoda, 1998, 2000;Toyoda & Kubota, 2001), and kanji in-struction (Flaherty & Noguchi, 1998;Kato, 2002; Shimizu & Green, 2002). Thesestudies suggest that students of Japaneseneed assistance to overcome such a barrierto literacy (Bourke, 1996; Usuki, 2000).
Recent research also suggests thatscholars should examine the extent to whichlearners are proactive in controllingtheir own language learning experiences(Dörnyei, 2001, 2005; Tseng, Dörnyei, &Schmitt, 2006). In 2005, Dörnyei developeda taxonomy of self‐regulation which wasintended to re‐theorize language learningstrategies (see Dörnyei, 2005; Tseng et al.,2006) as well as broaden the perspective offuture research into this field (Gao, 2006).
Dörnyei’s (2005) model of self‐regulationconsists of five categories of control:
1. Commitment control strategies for “help-ing preserve or increase the learner’s goalcommitment.”
2. Metacognitive control strategies for“monitoring and controlling concentra-tion and for curtailing unnecessaryprocrastination.”
3. Satiation control strategies for “eliminat-ing boredom and adding extra attractionor interest to the task.”
4. Emotion[al] control strategies for “man-aging disruptive emotional states ormoods and for generating emotions thatare conducive to implementing one’sintentions.”
5. Environmental control strategies for“eliminating negative environmental in-fluences” by “making an environment anally in the pursuit of a difficult goal.”(Dörnyei, 2005, p. 113)
Because previous studies suggested arelationship between language proficiencyand strategy use (Bourke, 1996; Oxford,2001), language researchers assumed thatself‐regulation during kanji learning mightalso differ as students’ proficiency increased;more recent research into kanji learning hassuggested that students from alphabeticlanguage backgrounds encounter the mostdifficulty at the beginning stages of kanjilearning, and it is at the advanced stages thatmore strategies are observed (Bourke, 1996;Sayeg, 1996; Usuki, 2000). Thus, the studyreported here aimed to answer the followingquestion: How do learners from alphabeticlanguage backgrounds who are at differentpoints in their study of Japanese regulatetheir learning of kanji in a yearlong studyprogram?
Research Methods
ParticipantsParticipants in the study were native speak-ers of a non‐character language and hadnative or near‐native proficiency in English;
Foreign Language Annals � VOL. 46, NO. 1 97
they were enrolled in a yearlong exchangeprogram at one of two universities in thegreater Tokyo area. Participants had three90‐minute instructional sessions per weekfocusing on spoken Japanese and Japanesegrammar and a 90‐minute class devoted tokanji learning. As is typical in Japan, thekanji classes focused on memorizing kanjicompounds, kanji writing practice, andkanji review rather than on reading authen-tic texts including kanji. Participants wereenrolled in the beginner course (knowledgeof less than 350 kanji), intermediate course(350–750 kanji), or advanced course (morethan 750 kanji) as determined by a kanjiplacement test based on the nationalJapanese Language Proficiency Test (JLPT)offered by The Japan Foundation.
Because “it is theoretically possible to bea ‘good’ beginner language learner and a‘poor’ advanced learner” (Grenfell &Macaro,2007, p. 15), the study adopted a maximumvariation sampling strategy so as to compareself‐regulation strategies and proficiency forboth extreme (good) and deviant (poor)cases. Twenty‐three participants expressedinterest in the study and were interviewedabout their self‐regulation of kanji learning(see the Appendix for these questions). Fromthis larger pool, the study purposivelyidentified 12 participants, including a possi-ble extreme and deviant case at eachproficiency level so as to gain the broadestpicture of kanji learning, as shown in Table 1.
Data CollectionBecause aspects of self‐regulation would notbe easily or accurately measured in a single
interview, or at a single time, participantswere interviewed 10 times throughout theyear in order to gain a fuller picture of eachstudent’s self‐regulation of kanji learning.The interview questions were based on dataobtained from focus groups with two groupsof five students the previous year during apilot study, mimicking the study by Tsenget al. (2006). Data from these focus groupswere integrated into the taxonomy of self‐regulation, also following the suggestionsmade in the Tseng et al. (2006) study. Theinterview questions were accompanied byfollow‐up probes that the researchers couldutilize to encourage students to elaborate ontheir answers (see the Appendix for ques-tions and probes). Data from the interviewswere coded using NVivo software andorganized into appropriate categories andsubcategories initially based on Dörnyei’sself‐regulation taxonomy, and they wereexpanded to include the following addition-al themes: goals, procrastination, boredom,interest, stress, and place. The final networkof codes is depicted in Figure 1.
Results and DiscussionA simple comparison summary of self‐regulation for the 12 cases is presented inTable 2. The continuum shows highly self‐regulated learners at the top and the learnerswho had difficulty regulating their kanjilearning at the bottom. These summaries arebased on both researchers’ independentassessments of 10 interviews over the courseof the year. The results for each of the self‐regulation categories (commitment control,metacognitive control, satiation control,
TABLE 1
Purposive Sampling of Participants
Kanjiknowledge
“Extreme” cases of highself‐regulation
“Typical”cases
“Deviant” cases oflow self‐regulation
High Sue Alex, Joshua Holden
Medium Paul Tim, Colton Jeremy
Low Sam Kate, Zara Maya
98 SPRING 2012
emotional control, and environmental con-trol) are presented below.
Commitment Control andGoal‐Setting ChallengesRegarding kanji study, participants at higherlevels of language proficiency found greaterdifficulty in meeting their commitments
with kanji learning than did lower‐profi-ciency learners. Data showed that higher‐proficiency participants tended to set long‐term goals that involved the study andreview of 1,000 to 2,000 kanji. Holden andSue (all names used are pseudonyms), forexample, wanted to pass the JLPT at levelN1, for which they needed 2,000 kanji.Joshua also needed knowledge of a similar
FIGURE 1
Tree Nodes to Code Self‐Regulation
Foreign Language Annals � VOL. 46, NO. 1 99
number of kanji to successfully graduatefrom his Master of Arts program. In all threecases, the students had great difficultyattaining these goals because of the magni-tude of the task and the limited time frame;they sometimes described the task asoverwhelming. For the lower‐proficiencyparticipants, commitment to kanji learningremained minimal and short term withmore manageable goals, such as passingclassroom kanji tests. Even though many ofthese lower‐proficiency participants alsohad longer‐term goals, repercussions fornot reaching these commitments were not asimmediate as for the higher‐proficiencylearners, whose education and future em-ployment depended on their success. Theoveremphasis of kanji list learning and kanjitesting in the context being researched maystem from Japan’s strong exam culture,which Seargeant (2009) stated is deep‐rooted in the Japanese education systemand is incompatible with communicativeapproaches to language teaching. Certainly,the kinds of learning practices observed inthis study involved the continuous learningand testing of kanji lists—mimicking prac-
tices in Japanese elementary schools. Theparticipants’ kanji learning goals rarelycentered on the reading process, or a stateddesire to read authentic or adapted texts,which researchers have argued is paramountfor Japanese reading development (Everson,2011). In this context, it seemed that theemphasis on list learning, as opposed toimproving the reading process, was bought tothe forefront in the goals set by the students,and the review of these previously learnedlists became overwhelming for the advancedstudents. Thus, a key finding of the studywasthat more advanced students lacked theability to manage these commitments, dueto the magnitude of their goals.
Two cases (Alex and Sue) handledcommitment control by breaking kanjilearning and review into regular self‐studytasks; they also took part in a self‐study kanjiprogram covering sets of 100 kanji tested inmonthly examinations. Although for thehigher‐proficiency students these examina-tions were a form of reviewing previouslylearned kanji, participants reported that aregular review system helped them setshorter‐term, manageable goals and gain
TABLE 2
A Summary of Self‐Regulation of Participants as Evaluated by Researchers
After Analysis of Interview Data
Case and
gender
Proficiency
level
Commitment
to kanji
learning
Is meta‐
cognitive
control a
challenge?
Is satiation
control a
challenge?
Is
emotional
control a
challenge?
Is
environmental
control a
challenge?
Holden (M) Very high High Yes Yes Yes Yes
Joshua (M) Very high High Somewhat Yes Yes Yes
Sue (F) Very high High Somewhat Yes Yes Somewhat
Kate (F) Low Mid‐high Yes No Somewhat Somewhat
Paul (M) Mid Mid No Somewhat Somewhat Somewhat
Maya (F) Very low Low Yes No Yes No
Colton (M) Mid Mid‐low Somewhat No No Somewhat
Jeremy (M) Mid Low Yes No No No
Alex (M) High Mid‐High Somewhat No No No
Zara (F) Low Mid‐low No No No No
Tim (M) Mid Mid‐high No No No No
Sam (M) Low Mid No No No No
100 SPRING 2012
control and confidence over the kanji‐learning task. Such findings concur withthe literature in the field of self‐regulationand goal‐setting. In a study analyzing theimpact of a self‐directed program that wassimilar in organization to the self‐study kanjiprogram considered here, for example,Bandura and Schunk (1981) also foundthat learners who set short‐term and specificgoals made 50%more progress than learnerswith general goals or distant goals. Otherliterature has emphasized that breaking agoal into small achievable steps with cleardeadlines is an essential part of goal setting(Dörnyei, 2001). Thus, these findings sup-port notions of previous research that havehighlighted the importance of short‐termand specific goal‐setting for the languagelearner (Bandura & Schunk, 1981; Dörnyei,2001).
Emotional Control Challenges Facedby the Kanji LearnerAs defined by Larsen and Prizmic (2004),emotion or affect regulation is the process ofmonitoring and evaluating feelings experi-enced by the learner at any given time.Breakdowns in emotional control can lead toepisodes of depression and anxiety (Nolen‐Hoeksema & Corte, 2004). The currentstudy revealed a complex network ofemotions, including self‐criticism, frustra-tion, and defeatism that had an impact onkanji learning. The three most advancedlearners (Holden, Joshua, and Sue) allreported negativity over a self‐perceivedlack of progress in kanji learning andreported stress, frustration, self‐criticism,and defeatism. Holden openly discussed hisdecision to “give up” on kanji learningbecause the constant review of kanji and adeterioration of knowledge seemed to havedefeated him. Joshua also reported self‐criticism regarding his inability to pushthrough procrastination issues in the kanji‐learning task as well as frustration over theconstant review of kanji he had once learnedbut forgotten. Joshua also doubted his abilityto master the number of kanji necessary to
graduate. Sue, although still actively en-gaged in kanji study, also expressed defeat-ism in the kanji learning task, feeling that itwas impossible to learn and remember allessential kanji, which led her to reassess herfuture career. This lack of emotional controlin higher‐proficiency students might beconnected to the magnitude of the kanji‐learning task. Beginner‐level students study-ing a set number of kanji each week withregular structured assessments are able toclearly see their progression in kanji learn-ing. At the higher proficiency level, howev-er, when students no longer have formaltraining in kanji or help reviewing thou-sands of kanji, the task seems daunting, theirprogress is not as obviously measurable, andemotional control breaks down.
Satiation Control Challenges Facedby the Kanji LearnerThe connection between proficiency andsatiation control problems was particularlystrong in this study. Of the 12 participants,the three highest‐proficiency students(Holden, Joshua, and Sue) reportedexperiencing the most problems with satia-tion control, including difficulty controllingincreasing boredom as well as diminishingsatisfaction and waning interest in kanjilearning as their kanji knowledge advancedand more review became necessary. Partic-ipants of lower proficiency reported satia-tion as a problem far less frequently. ForSam, one of the least proficient students,satiation control was not a challenge. On thecontrary, Sam derived immense satisfactionfrom kanji learning due to self‐drivenhistorical and cultural interest in kanji.
A number of students suggested sol-utions to control interest in kanji study, suchas moderating the time spent on studying orbreaking a study session into smaller parts,with rewards for completing each part.According to Larsen and Prizmic (2004),the use of self‐reward is a common feature ofbehavioral approaches to self‐regulation,including buying oneself a present (self‐gifting) or taking a break and going for a
Foreign Language Annals � VOL. 46, NO. 1 101
walk (self‐rewarding). Research has shownthat self‐gifting can reduce negative affectand increase positive affect associated withcompletion of a task or goal (Faber &Vohs, 2004). Participants in the currentstudy reported multiple examples of self‐rewards as a self‐regulatory strategy, thusconcurring with the general literature on thepositive influence of self‐rewarding as ameans of self‐regulation (Faber & Vohs,2004; Larsen & Prizmic, 2004).
Other participants offered strategiesthat involved choosing or changing thestudy environment to maintain interest inthe kanji‐learning task. Paul reported study-ing kanji while exercising on an exercisebike or treadmill to be highly effective. Indoing so, Paul argued that the interest inkanji study increased in comparison withthe boring nature of exercising. He alsoreported the benefits of adrenaline indecreasing stress, indicating the strategyto be effective for regulating emotionalcontrol. While these ideas might at firstappear unorthodox, the use of exercise asmeans of self‐regulation has been reportedin research in the field. Larsen and Prizmic(2004) wrote: “It may seem ironic that theuse of energy (to exercise) actually elevatesenergy, but the impact of exercise on affectand felt energy has been reliably demon-strated in a number of studies” (p. 48).Stevens and Lane (2001), for example,found exercise to be an effective strategyfor regulating depression, tension, andfatigue. Thus, the finding of the currentstudy that exercise is also an effective way toregulate boredom and control satiation isnot dissimilar to these previously noteddiscoveries.
Environmental Control and KanjiLearningWhenever environmental control was raisedin the interview data, it was presented as ameans of regulating another form of control.Such results indicate that environmentalcontrol may not be a separate category ofcontrol in itself, but a self‐regulatory
mechanism or strategy to control otherforms of regulation. In this capacity, thestrategy of controlling one’s learning envi-ronment was shown to have extremelypositive effects on learners’ self‐regulation.For example, participants reported regulat-ing their study environment in order toalleviate boredom (by changing the studyenvironment regularly), stress (by exercis-ing while studying, or choosing a relaxingenvironment), or procrastination (by creat-ing an environment free of distractions).From the learner’s perspective, therefore,environmental control shows an abilityto positively affect a learner’s self‐regulation,which has clear teaching and learningimplications (discussed next). From aresearch perspective, this result is significantbecause the Tseng et al. (2006) study,on which this study is loosely based,suggested that its approach and model ofself‐regulation would be “transferable toresearching other facets of second languagelearning” (p. 80). However, this studyrevealed that the inclusion of the categoryof environmental control did not yieldresults in the same way as the other fourcategories for the task of kanji learning. Thisresult also suggests that this model of self‐regulation may be subject to the samedefinitional fuzziness for which Dörnyei(2005) criticized previous models of strate-gic learning (see Rose, 2012, for furtherdiscussion).
Conclusions and Pedagogical
Implications
Implications for Japanese LanguageInstructorsShimizu and Green (2002) noted thatJapanese language instructors widely agreethat kanji learning is an extremely difficulttask for students. Beginning learners ofJapanese are often oblivious to this difficul-ty, and instructors have to strike the rightbalance of being honest with students overthe difficulty of kanji learning while notdissuading them from their pursuit ofJapanese language study. This case study
102 SPRING 2012
has attributed part of the breakdown in self‐regulation to the setting of unrealistic andunachievable goals in kanji learning. Manystudents expect to become fluent in thelanguage after a few years of universitystudy. This is perhaps due to comparisonswith European languages, which the nativeEnglish speaker is able to acquire morequickly than the Japanese language. Stu-dents need to be aware that kanji learning isa lifelong task, and that even native Japanesespeakers spend nine or more years of formaleducation to achieve adult functionalliteracy.
This study has shown it is at theintermediate and advanced levels wherestudents have the biggest breakdown ofcommitment control, due to progress beingless obvious to the learner, as opposed to thebeginning stages in which knowledge ofkanji may double in a single semester‐longbasic or pre‐intermediate Japanese languagecourse, making it easier to track progress. Atthe intermediate and advanced levels, theresponsibility to retain previously learnedkanji as well as new kanji often shifts to thelearner. For the advanced learner progress isnot only less obvious, but can even seem attimes to be moving in the wrong direction,as previously known kanji become forgot-ten. Learners need to be systematic abouttheir goals for kanji learning. According toMcCombs and Pope (1994), a goal must bebelievable, achievable, conceivable, anddesirable. A breakdown in emotional controloften stems from the fact that a goal nolonger seems believable to a student, whichmanifests in a loss of self‐efficacy. Accordingto Zimmerman (2000), self‐efficacy beliefsand goal setting are strongly connected.Achieving goals improves self‐efficacy, and ahigher self‐efficacy influences good futuregoal setting. A student at timesmay set a goalthat is only achievable in the long term, suchas mastering the 2,000 essential kanji, orpassing the first level of the JLPT. Withoutshort‐term goals tomeasure progress towardthis long‐term goal, this goal will no longerseem achievable to a learner. Japaneselanguage students would therefore benefit
from more realistic, achievable, and believ-able goal setting, which would reduce thenegative affect associated with the failure toreach a goal.
The kanji instructor can help studentsovercome barriers associated with kanjilearning from the outset of their programof studies. The instructor needs to be awarethat frequent quizzes, while a necessary partof kanji learning, detract from the impor-tance of maintaining knowledge of previ-ously taught kanji and using kanji to readauthentic and meaningful texts. Instructorscould make use of assessment techniquesthat shift the focus from testing knowledgeof new kanji through kanji quizzes tolearning kanji for communicative purposes.Such purposes include reading for pleasureand to reinforce and increase content knowl-edge, and to learn about cultural practices,products, perspectives, and points of view andprovide informal opportunities for review.Doing this also emphasizes the importance ofthe learning process and ultimate usefulnessof kanji learning, rather than regurgitation ofknowledge that often is crammed into short‐termmemory before a student takes a test andthen is soon forgotten.
This study has also shown that control-ling the environment can be a powerfulstrategy to improve a learner’s self‐regulationover negative factors affecting learning.Japanese instructors are in a position tochange the teaching and learning environ-ment of a learner through the provision ofmaterials and assessments that are based oncommunicative pedagogical practices, rath-er than the rote memorization of kanji listspopularized by Japan’s examination culture.Everson’s (2011) call for the creation ofmore authentic reading materials aimed atvarying proficiency levels in Japanese wouldprove a useful practice for students to reviewpreviously learned kanji in a more realisticway. These actions will all help learners takemore control over the negative emotionconnected to kanji learning, because thevalue of what they already know will bebrought to the forefront, rather than whatthey have yet to learn.
Foreign Language Annals � VOL. 46, NO. 1 103
The emotional toll of kanji learning forstudents is not a matter that should betreated lightly—nor is it a problem that iseasily solvable. Japanese instructors are in aposition to raise awareness that students’struggles are a normal part of kanji acquisi-tion. Everson (2011) argued that “teachersserve as powerful purveyors of both lan-guage and culture, and can influencestudents’ views that their difficulties inlearning kanji are not because they aresomehow ill‐equipped for the learning taskwhich is somehow beyond them” (p. 265).Bandura (1989) argued that self‐reflectionand self‐evaluation are key to the develop-ment of a healthy sense of self‐efficacy.Zimmerman (2000) also stressed the impor-tance of self‐evaluation to self‐efficacybeliefs. Thus, the act of having studentsmeasure and reflect on previous accomplish-ments and achievements rather than focus-ing on goals yet to be achieved can help kanjilearners’ emotional state.
Thus, instructors can play an importantrole in avoiding the breakdown of self‐regulation in kanji learning through discus-sing the difficulty of learning from the outsetof studying the Japanese language, by aidingstudents to set realistic short‐ and long‐termgoals for their kanji learning, and byproviding students with a systematic waytomeasure progress as well as use previouslylearned kanji in a meaningful way. Theimplications of the study firmly concur withEverson’s (2011) assessment that “getting toknow our students and how they feel aboutlearning these languages and what theybelieve the difficulties are will be helpful toremedy these problems” (p. 265). Thisstudy, therefore, increases language educa-tors’ understanding of students’ feelings,struggles, and triumphs when learning theJapanese language.
Conclusion and Implications forFurther ResearchThis study is the first to examine the task ofkanji learning through the theory of self‐regulation and has implications for both
theory and practice. In terms of theory, theframework of self‐regulation has shown itsstrength in highlighting the difficultiesstudents have whenmanaging their learningof kanji, but it has also revealed a categoricalfuzziness in terms of environmental control.Such a result has implications for futurestudies that apply Dörnyei’s model of self‐regulation to other domains of languagelearning. In terms of practice, this group oflearners revealed much about how studentsregulate their study of kanji. Interviewsshowed metacognitive, satiation, and emo-tional control as particular areas thatchallenge students in the kanji‐learningtask. Interviews also highlighted a numberof strategies that learners use to self‐regulatethe kanji‐learning task, including the ma-nipulation of the environment and methodsof learning. The study also highlighted howthe level of commitment has an effect onsatiation and emotional control, as does alsothe level of proficiency of the student. Thestudy indicates that these are areas that mayneed to be addressed by both instructors andstudents in order to advance in the kanji‐learning task. Without dealing with theseissues, students such as the ones in thisstudy may feel defeated by the magnitude ofthe task as their learning progresses.
References
Bandura, A. (1989). Social cognitive theory. InR. Vasta (Ed.), Annals of child development. Vol.6 Six theories of child development (pp. 1–60).Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Bandura, A., & Schunk, D. H. (1981).Cultivating competence, self‐efficacy, andintrinsic interest through proximal self‐motivation. Journal of Personality and SocialPsychology, 41, 586–598.
Bourke, B. (1996). Maximising the kanjilearning task [Unpublished doctoral disserta-tion]. TheUniversity of Queensland, Australia.
Bramley, N., & Hanamura, N. (1998). Theteaching and learning of Japanese at Australianuniversities: An overview. Australian Review ofApplied Linguistics, Series S, 15, 1–10.
Dörnyei, Z. (2001). Teaching and researchingmotivation. London: Longman.
104 SPRING 2012
Dörnyei, Z. (2005). The psychology of thelanguage learner: Individual differences insecond language acquisition. Mahwah, NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum.
Dwyer, E. S. (1997). Getting started the rightway: An investigation into the introduction ofkanji study to neophyte Japanese learners[Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. The Uni-versity of Texas, Austin.
Everson, M. E. (2011). Best practices inteaching logographic and non‐Roman writingsystems to L2 learners. Annual Review ofApplied Linguistics, 31, 249–274.
Faber, R. J., & Vohs, K. D. (2004). To buy ornot to buy? Self‐control and self‐regulatoryfailure in purchase behaviour. In R. F.Baumeister & K. D. Vohs (Eds.), Handbookof self‐regulation: Research, theory, and appli-cation (pp. 509–524). New York: The GilfordPress.
Flaherty, M., & Noguchi, M. S. (1998).Effectiveness of different writing approachesto kanji education with second languagelearners. JALT Journal, 20, 60–78.
Gao, X. (2006). Has language learning strategyresearch come to an end? A response to Tsenget al. Applied Linguistics, 28, 615–620.
Grenfell, M., & Macaro, E. (2007). Claims andcritiques. In D. C. Cohen & E. M. Macaro(Eds.), Language learner strategies (pp. 9–28).Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Guruz, K. (2008). Higher education andinternational student mobility in the globalknowledge economy. New York: SUNY Press.
Kato, F. (2002). Efficacy of interventionstrategies in learning success rates. ForeignLanguage Annals, 35, 61–72.
Larsen, R. J., & Prizmic, Z. (2004). Affectregulation. In R. F. Baumeister & K. D. Vohs(Eds.), Handbook of self‐regulation: Research,theory, and application (pp. 40–61). New York:The Gilford Press.
Lu, M., Webb, J. M., Krus, D. J., & Fox, L. S.,(1999). Using order analytic instructionalhierarchies of mnemonics to facilitate learningChinese and Japanese “kanji” characters. TheJournal of Experimental Education, 67, 293–311.
McCombs, B. L., & Pope, J. E. (1994).Motivating hard to reach students. Washington,DC: American Psychological Association.
Nolen‐Hoeksema, S., & Corte, C. (2004).Gender and self‐regulation. In R. F. Baumeister
& K. D. Vohs (Eds.), Handbook of self‐regulation: Research, theory, and application(pp. 411–421). New York: The Gilford Press.
Okita, Y. (1996). Kanji learning strategiesand verbal and visual style [Unpublisheddoctoral dissertation]. University of Hawaii,Honolulu.
Oxford, R. (2001). Language learning strate-gies. In D. Nunan & R. Carter (Eds.), TheCambridge guide to teaching English to speakersof other languages. Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press.
Rose, H. (2012). Reconceptualizing strategiclearning in the face of self‐regulation:Throwing language learning strategies outwith the bathwater. Applied Linguistics, 33,92–98.
Samimy, K. K., & Tabuse, M. (1992). Affectivevariables and less commonly taught language:A study in beginning Japanese classes.Language Learning, 42, 377–398.
Sayeg, Y. (1996). The role of sound in readingkanji and kana: A review. Australian Review ofApplied Linguistics, 19, 139–151.
Seargeant, P. (2009). The idea of English inJapan. Ideology and the evolution of a globallanguage. Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters.
Shimauchi, S. (2009, March 21). Japaneselanguage education policy toward increasingforeign students in Japanese societies withhistorical perspective. Paper presented at theannualmeeting of the 53rd Annual Conferenceof the Comparative and International Educa-tion Society, Charleston, South Carolina.Retrieved January 18, 2013, from http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p302762_index.html
Shimizu, H., & Green, K. (2002). Japaneselanguage educators’ strategies and attitudestoward teaching kanji. Modern LanguageJournal, 86, 227–241.
Stevens, M. J., & Lane, A. M. (2001). Moodregulating strategies used by athletes. AthleticInsight: Online Journal of Sport Psychology, 3[Electronic publication]. Retrieved January 18,2013, from http://www.athleticinsight.com
Toyoda, E. (1998). Teaching kanji by focusingon learners’ development of graphemic aware-ness. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics,21, Series S, 155–168.
Toyoda, E. (2000). English‐speaking learners’use of component information in processingunfamiliar kanji. Australian Review of AppliedLinguistics, 23, 1–14.
Foreign Language Annals � VOL. 46, NO. 1 105
Toyoda, E., & Kubota, M. (2001). Learningstrategies employed for learning words writtenin kanji versus kana. Australian Review ofApplied Linguistics, 24, 1–16.
Tseng, W. T., Dörnyei, Z., & Schmitt, N. (2006).A new approach to assessing strategic learning:The case of self‐regulation in vocabulary acquisi-tion. Applied Linguistics, 27, 78–102.
Usuki, M. (2000). Promoting learner autonomy:Learning fromthe Japanese language learners’perspec-tive. Research report [ERIC No. ED450588].
Walton, A. R. (1993). Japanese language inU.S. high schools: A new initiative. ModernLanguage Journal, 77, 522–523.
Zimmerman, B. (2000). Self‐efficacy: Anessential motive to learn. ContemporaryEducational Psychology, 25, 82–91.
Submitted December 19, 2011
Accepted January 2, 2013
APPENDIX
Interview Questions
The interview questions have been organized into main questions, which were always askedto all participants, and follow‐up questions or probes used to elicit more information wherenecessary.
Part One (for initial interview only)
These questions concern students’ past experiences of studying Japanese.
1. Can I first ask you about your Japanese learning background?Probes: How long have you studied Japanese?/Where have you studied?
2. What kind of learning have you taken part in?Probes: What kind of Japanese classes have you taken in the past?/How active were theseclasses?/What did a typical lesson consist of?
3. How do you feel about learning kanji in your Japanese learning so far?Probes: Do you find it difficult? Fun? Challenging? Overwhelming?/How much do youalready know?/How do you feel about studying kanji in the future?
Part Two (for initial and ongoing interviews)
The questions concerned students’ regulation of learning in the preceding week(s).
1. What kanji learning goals, if any, did you set for yourself since our last interview?Probes: What do you think of your willpower in achieving these goals?/Did you feelsatisfied/confident about your willpower?/Did you feel the methods to control yourwillpower were effective/useful?/Any other reflections on the methods used?
2. Think back to your last Japanese kanji lesson or study period dedicated to learning kanji.How did you feel during this lesson/period?Probes: Did you feel bored/afraid/impatient about this situation?/If so, what did you doabout this feeling?/Did you feel satisfied/confident about your methods to control thisnegative feeling?/How effective/useful were the methods?
106 SPRING 2012
3. Think about the last kanji test you had to take. How did you prepare for it?Probes: Did you procrastinate in reviewing the words? If so, what made you procrastinate?/Comment on themethods used to stop procrastination./Did you feel easily distracted? If so,why did you feel easily distracted?
4. How did you feel when learning a new group of kanji this week?Probes: Did you feel easily bored?/If so, why did you feel easily bored?/Comment on themethods used to get rid of the feeling of boredom./If not, how do you maintain interest?/Comment on the methods used to enhance concentration.
5. Where and when did you study kanji in the past week?Probes: How did you select a conducive time and place for your learning? (e.g., waiting fora bus, during a classroom break, your own room)/Which environments were best/worst foryou?/Comment on the methods used to control the learning environment.
