Sociocultural Dynamics of ESL Learning (De)Motivation: An Activity Theory Analysis of Two Adult Korean Immigrants
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examines the longitudinal trajectories of two Korean ESL immigrants' L2 learning motivation from an Activity Theory perspective. Two highly skilled immigrants participated in monthly semi-structured interviews over a period of 10 months. The research questions are as follows: (1) How does the relationship between ESL learners and their perceived social contexts affect and shape the way in which their ESL learning motivation develops? (2) How can the factors affecting the changes in ESL learning motivation be explained from an Activity Theory perspective? The recurring themes in the monthly interview data were coded and aligned to Engeström's (1999a) activity-system model; important interactions among the subcomponents of the model are presented and discussed. The results indicate that (1) the dynamism in ESL learning (de)motivation can be coherently explained in a series of longitudinal activity-system models; and (2) that it is not the ESL context per se but each participant's recognition of it that plays a pivotal role in creating, maintaining, and terminating ESL learning motivation.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".