Language teachers and researchers have probably always felt, intuitively at least, that motivation plays an important part in second language learning. Gardner and Lambert (1959, cited in Gardner, 1988) finally demonstrated through multivariate analysis that both language aptitude and social motivation were related to achievement in second language acquisition (SLA). Many studies have since replicated or built on that finding, and now it is generally recognized that motivation is an important factor in SLA, independent of aptitude.
        Although they disagree to some extent about the exact role, several of the major theories of SLA include motivation as either a direct or indirect factor in language learning. This paper begins by discussing the role assigned to motivation in three prominent models of SLA--Krashen's (1978, 1981) Monitor Model, Schumann's (1978, 1986) Acculturation Model, and Gardner's (1979) Socio-Educational Model. The remainder of the paper addresses the question of whether computer-assisted language learning (CALL) can contribute to increasing motivation among second language learners, and speculates as to how CALL activities might be integrated into language programs in order to provide motivation to learners.
 
 

        It seems that computers, used judiciously in classrooms, can be fun, exciting, stimulating--and therefore motivating--to language learners. Computer games and activities, for example, can perhaps lower affective filters and, therefore, as Krashen and others would suggest, allow more language acquisition (or learning) to take place. Computer communications and pair or group activities centered around computer tasks can sometimes increase the amount of interaction that takes place among learners as well as between individual learners and the language material. On the other hand, these are some of the same arguments that have been made in the past for such new innovations as listening labs, video, and many other approaches, methods, and techniques of all kinds. All of these can help make learning more interesting or even fun, and they certainly have their places in language programs, but obviously none of them, including computers, is an ultimate solution.
        Instead, language teachers and administrators have to consider carefully how computers are going to fit into their overall programs, without assuming that computers in themselves are automatically motivating to students. The CALL activities must be well-designed and appropriate for the goals of the course, the students' levels, and even personalities and interests if they are expected to provide motivation. In addition, research needs to be aimed at finding out specifically what it is about computers and CALL that students find motivating so that this can be worked into language programs.
        At the same time, there are some features of computers that are motivating for other than purely affective considerations. Word processing, for example, makes it easier for students to manipulate text and revise what they have written, which has already been shown to improve students' attitude toward writing and encourage them to write more and spend more time revising. Well-written CALL materials can also save time by individualizing lessons to a student's personal ability, needs, and interests. They also can present material through several media and at a rate that can be controlled by the student himself or herself. Computers can provide immediate feedback on correctness and can give immediate and individualized help when a student has problems or questions. All of these things are potentially motivating to serious students interested in developing proficiency in a language as quickly as possible, and provide easy ways for learners to put themselves into a number of language learning situations.
        All three models of second language acquisition discussed earlier predict that learners who actively seek out opportunities to interact with the target language and/or speakers of the target language will ultimately be more successful. Computers and CALL activities definitely have the potential to make it easier for highly-motivated students to increase interactions--both with the language and with other learners or target language speakers through computer communications. In addition, easy accessibility to computer training that produces noticeable positive results may act to increase the motivation of less-motivated students, as well as provide a practical means for students to maintain their level of proficiency in a foreign language once their formal training ends. Finally, computers may contribute to lowering students' affective filters, and the Monitor Model and the Acculturation Model predict that this in itself should positively influence the actual amount of language acquisition that takes place. Obviously, then, the use of computers in language learning and teaching has much to offer in terms of motivation.
 
 

Beebe, L. M., & Zuengler, J. (1983). Accommodation theory: An explanation for style shifting in second language dialects. In N. Wolfson & E. Judd (Eds.), Sociolinguistics and language acquisition (pp. 195-213). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.

Blau, S. R., & Campbell, P. B. (1991). To nibble or byte: The impact of computers on the skills and attitudes of first-year college writing students. Computers in Schools, 8(4), 147-157.

Cassidy, J. E. (September 1983). Using computers to teach foreign languages to adults. CALICO Journal, 14-16.

Church, D. M. (September 1988). On the use of carrots and sticks in CALL. CALICO Journal, 37-45.

Clifford, R. (June 1987). The status of computer-assisted language instruction. CALICO Journal, 9-16.

Gardner, R. C. (1979). Social psychological aspects of second-language acquisition. In H. Giles & R. N. St. Clair (Eds.), Language and social psychology. Oxford: Blackwell.

Gardner, R. C., Lalonde, R. N., & Moorcroft, R. (1987). Second language attrition: The role of motivation and use. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 6(1), 29-47.

Gardner, R. C., & Lambert, W. E. (1959). Motivational variables in second language acquisition. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 13(4), 266-272.

Giles, H., & Byrne, J. (1982). An intergroup approach to second language acquisition. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 3(1), 17-40.

Krashen, S. (1978). The monitor model for second-language acquisition. In R. C. Gringras (Ed.), Second-language acquisition and foreign language teaching (pp. 1-26). Roslyn, VA: Center for Applied Linguistics.

Krashen, S. (1981). Second language acquisition and second language learning. New York: Pergamon.

Moore, M. A., & Karabenick, S. A. (1992). The effects of computer communications on the reading and writing performance of fifth-grade students. Computers in Human Behavior, 8, 27-38.

Schumann, J. H. (1978). The acculturation model for second-language acquisition. In R. C. Gringras (Ed.), Second-language acquisition and foreign language teaching (pp.27-50). Roslyn, VA: Center for Applied Linguistics.

Simonson, S. E. (June 1985). Student approach and reaction to CAI: An analysis of evaluations and logs. CALICO Journal, 35-39.