understand. I always talk quitely even when I speak Japanese. In addition to this, I can’t speak English well. So when I don’t speak English loudly, you can’t hear and understand what I want to say. It is not good. That is the reason I chose this one. I could teach the English word meaning to my pair. And I speak clearly in that, and my pair look like he understand. … I tried to speak loudly and clearly in today’s class. I can almost do, but sometimes I can’t. I thought I should keep trying. (Kouhei, W4)
To provide some background: As part of the wider action research, I had encouraged students to choose and try to act on a behavioural hope each lesson (Sampson, 2018). In the extract, Kouhei hoped to ‘help others understand’ (lesson timescale – motivation). Long timescale processes of personality and past experiences form the psychological context for this intention. It seems that Kouhei feels disappointment with his personality – ‘I talk quitely even when I speak Japanese’ alongside conflict between understandings of his L2 identity as somebody who ‘can’t speak English well’ and a belief that ‘it is not good’ when others ‘can’t hear and understand what I want to say’ (L2 study experiences – life timescale). Interactions with these understandings strongly channel his actions at the activity timescale (Witherington, 2011), whereby he notes that he ‘could teach the English word meaning to my pair’. He attributes a partial sense of achievement of his behavioural hope to his perception that he could ‘speak clearly in that, and my pair look like he understand’, feeding forward to additional motivation to ‘keep trying’ similar actions (activity, lesson and lesson-series timescales). That is, Kouhei’s sense-making is heavily dependent on his perceptions of his own actions and the re-actions from his partner, in the ongoing context of his psychology.
Although Ushioda (2011: 21–22) does not refer to feelings explicitly, she argues that ‘it is through social participation in opportunities, negotiations and activities that people’s motivations and identities develop and emerge as dynamically co-constructed processes’. Individuals co-form social context, which iteratively forms the playing field for behaviour and understandings – including feelings – of individuals making up the social context (Sampson, 2016a). These feelings and perceptions are carried forward to form the context for future interactions (Juarrero, 2002; Kauffman, 2008). By tracing reflections of participants over time and comparing with those of their partners, I could understand not only interacting timescales but moreover the dynamic co-construction of feelings in the classroom from different perspectives. Moving to extracts from the entries of Kouhei and his new partner for the following lesson:
I chose ‘Praise each other’ in today’s class. I could encourage my pair at today’s activity. I remembered what I tried to do last week lesson, so I told my pair that she can speaking English clearly. I could understand well what she wanted to say. I understand clearly because of my partner, so I think it important to speak clearly. … I also could speak more actively and clearly, so I think it was good to improve our English each other. (Kouhei, W5)
I choose ‘help each other understand’ because I have been returned to listen some times. I tried to speak clearly. Today, I wasn’t said ‘one more time’, so I might speak clearly than usual. … I seemed that I could have a conversation in English this lesson. So I would like to keep trying to use English. (Moe, W5)
From Kouhei’s perspective, he chooses an ideal for action different from that of the previous week, with motivation to ‘praise each other’ (lesson timescale). While this is a new intention, it is clearly positioned in the midst of his experiences from the previous week (lesson series timescale): Kouhei recalls his own efforts and reflections on his beliefs such that he ‘could encourage my pair’ by telling Moe that ‘she can speaking English clearly’ (activity timescale – sense of achievement). He also experiences a kind of gratitude towards Moe in that he ‘could understand well what she wanted to say’. Interestingly, it is also possible to see how Kouhei’s perceptions are afforded, perhaps serendipitously, by investigating the journal entry of his new partner: Moe had chosen to act on the hope ‘help each other understand’ (lesson timescale – motivation) through disappointment in her experiences that she had ‘been returned to listen some times’ (life timescale). She acts on this hope to change by trying to speak more clearly. Although she does not mention Kouhei’s praise, she does note a sense of achievement in that ‘I wasn’t said “one more time”’ (lesson timescale). That is, while Moe’s feelings are afforded by both her own and Kouhei’s actions, Kouhei’s belief that ‘I think it important to speak clearly’ (lesson-series to life timescale) is reinforced through the interaction of his own ongoing psychology with his noticing that ‘I understand clearly because of my partner’ (lesson timescale). Moreover, we can also understand that both Kouhei and Moe’s sense of progress, related positive affect and motivation in the development of an L2 identity emerge through the interplay of their ongoing psychologies with the context that they co-formed for the lesson.
Conclusion
The data discussed in this chapter were drawn from a research project which did not initially set out to investigate L2 study feelings. Instead, it was my developing interest in the feelings of my learners emergent from my interactions with the data that prompted me to look at one tool in more detail. To this end, questions may undoubtedly be raised about the reliability of making claims based on only this one form of data (participant journals). Nevertheless, the journals did provide situated insights into the psychologies and perceptions of experience of learners in my classes, suggesting a useful direction for research explicitly focusing on L2 study feelings. In general, employing complexity thinking encouraged me to attempt to interpret the frequently ambivalent ebb and flow of my learners’ feelings through interactions across different timescales with other aspects of their psychologies and the social context. The two methods of data analysis described in this chapter do take considerable time to conduct. However, I also believe that multiple threading and timescales analysis does a reasonable job of furnishing visual representations of the emotional context that any teacher encounters and co-forms together with learners in a classroom (Sampson, 2016b). And, considering that recent work in neurobiology (Immordino-Yang, 2016; Immordino-Yang & Fischer, 2016) and the sociodynamic construction of emotions (Boiger & Mesquita, 2015) reveals the constant, dynamic interplay between emotions, cognition and the environment, our students’ feelings matter for their learning. Future research might usefully mix data collection tools to gain multiple perspectives and explicitly gather data on different timescales, adding to learner and teacher journals by employing classroom observations, video-recording of classroom activity or analysis of (verbal) interactions. It is my hope that the current chapter provides at least some suggestions for how complexity perspectives can further assist in working towards describing more situated and nuanced landscapes of the emergence of L2 study feelings.
References
Boiger, M. and Mesquita, B. (2015) A sociodynamic perspective on the construction of emotion. In L. Feldman Barrett and J.A. Russell (eds) The Psychological Construction of Emotion (pp. 377–398). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
Boudreau, C., MacIntyre, P.D. and Dewaele, J.-M. (2018) Enjoyment and anxiety in second language communication: An idiodynamic approach. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching 8 (1), 149–170.
Cahour, B. (2013) Emotions: Characteristics, emergence and circulation in interactional learning. In M. Baker, J. Andriessen and S. Jarvela (eds) Affective Learning Together: Social and Emotional Dimensions of Collaborative Learning (pp. 52–70). Abingdon: Routledge.
Damasio, A. (2003) Looking for Spinoza: Joy, Sorrow and the Feeling Brain. London: Vintage.
Davis, B. and Sumara, D. (2006) Complexity and Education: Inquiries into Learning, Teaching, and Research. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
de Bot, K. (2015) Rates of change: Timescales in second language development. In Z. Dörnyei, P.D. MacIntyre and A. Henry (eds) Motivational Dynamics in Language Learning (pp. 29–37). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
de Wolf, T. and Holvoet, T. (2005) Emergence versus self-organization: Different concepts but promising when combined. In S.A. Brueckner, G. Di Marzo Serugendo, A. Karageorgos and R. Nagpal (eds) Engineering Self-Organising Systems: Methodologies and Applications (pp. 1–15). Berlin: Springer.
Dewaele,