Running Head: TEENAGERS ABROAD 1

Teenagers Abroad

A Study of High School Exchange Students’ Language Learning Experiences

Sarah Alami

Gonzaga University
 ProQuest Number: 10111681

All rights reserved

INFORMATION TO ALL USERS

The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted.

In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript
and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed,
a note will indicate the deletion.

ProQuest 10111681

Published by ProQuest LLC (2016). Copyright of the Dissertation is held by the Author.

All rights reserved.

This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code
Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC.

ProQuest LLC.
789 East Eisenhower Parkway
P.O. Box 1346
Ann Arbor, MI 48106 - 1346
TEENAGERS ABROAD 2

Teenagers Abroad

A Study of High School Exchange Students’ Language Learning Experiences

By

Sarah Alami

MA/TESL

Date:___________________________

Approved:

____________________________
Dr. Mary Martha Savage, Chair

_____________________________
Christina Mitma, MA, Gonzaga University English Language Center

_____________________________
Karla Sconiers, MA, Lakeside High School

A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the

requirements for the degree of Master of Arts
in the Teaching English as a Second Language
In the Graduate School of
Gonzaga University

September 2014
TEENAGERS ABROAD 3

Acknowledgements

The researcher received indispensable support from these very special professionals, friends and

family members, and would like to acknowledge their expertise and encouragement:

 Dr. Mary Martha Savage, Thesis Chair, first and foremost, for her enduring patience,

ever-stimulating high expectations, and unconditional support.

 Christina Mitma, Reader, for her interest in this research, valuable feedback, and precious

friendship.

 Karla Sconiers, Reader, for putting more time in this project than most, for her

undemanding support, and for her insightful comments.

 The local High School principal and staff, for allowing and making space for this

research.

 The primary participants, in no particular order: Julie, Mia, Tanja, Jefferson, and Irene,

for sharing their time and perspectives selflessly and despite their busy schedules.

 The secondary participants: the students’ families and the local school staff for their time

and observations.

 Amy Wetterau, thesis group member, for her everlasting optimism and encouragement.

 Maram Albalawi, thesis group member, for showing me how to get it done.

 Kathleen Nollenberger, honorary thesis group member and weekend cheerleader.

 MATESL faculty and staff, for sharing their knowledge throughout this program.

 MATESL students for contributing to each class.

 Xiang “Jing” Jing, for enduring many months of talk about this thesis.

 The Alami family, for their support from abroad.

TEENAGERS ABROAD 4

 James and LaDonna Sicafoose, for being a caring second family and for being an integral

part of my personal and academic journey, every step of the way.

Without this tremendous support and companionship, this project would never have come to see

the light.

Thank you.
TEENAGERS ABROAD 5

Abstract

High School Exchange Programs have been promoted as an educational and political tool for

many decades. This study focused on international high school exchange students’ perceptions

and analyses of their own language learning experiences. The primary source of data are five

case studies during the participants’ second and final semesters of study in the United States. The

results reveal that the participants underwent two parallel shifts: from approaching the English

language as a goal in and of itself to understanding English as a tool to support their second shift

of redefining themselves as social beings in a new context. Various communities of practice and

their roles were identified, underscoring the difficulty of acquiring Legitimate Peripheral

Participation (LPP). The relevance of studies of Willingness to Communicate (WTC) is

demonstrated. Language learning experiences are also separated between Language Learning

Strategies (LLS) that were noticeable and conscious and ones that were neither noticeable nor

conscious, and which appear to make up the bulk of these participants’ learning experiences. The

example of participants’ use of discourse marker like is used to illustrate the depth of these

participants’ unconscious learning.

Keywords: High school exchange, study abroad, case study, Second Language

Acquisition (SLA), Willingness to Communicate (WTC), Communities of Practice (COP),

Language Learning Strategies (LLS), Legitimate Peripheral Participation (LPP).

TEENAGERS ABROAD 6

Table of Contents

Acknowledgements ................................................................................................................... 3

Abstract ..................................................................................................................................... 5

Table of Contents ...................................................................................................................... 6

Chapter 1 ..................................................................................................................................... 12

Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 12

Role of the Researcher ............................................................................................................ 13

Need and Significance of this study ....................................................................................... 14

Purpose and Description of the Study..................................................................................... 15

Roadmap of this Study............................................................................................................ 17

Chapter 2: Literature review ..................................................................................................... 18

High School Exchange Programs ........................................................................................... 18

Exchange programs. .............................................................................................................. 18

U.S. demographics. ............................................................................................................... 21

English as a foreign language. .............................................................................................. 23

Programmatic Factors in Language Acquisition During Foreign Sojourn ............................. 23

Age and second language acquisition. .................................................................................. 23

Length of exposure. .............................................................................................................. 24

Language-Learning Processes in Foreign Sojourn ................................................................. 30

Beyond the foreign language classroom. .............................................................................. 30

TEENAGERS ABROAD 7

A study of high school foreign exchange. ............................................................................ 33

Characteristics of Successful Foreign Sojourn ....................................................................... 44

Identity. ................................................................................................................................. 44

The Process of Acculturation. ............................................................................................... 46

Relevant Discourse Markers ................................................................................................... 50

Summary of Literature Review............................................................................................... 52

Chapter 3: Methodology............................................................................................................. 55

Theoretical Framework ........................................................................................................... 55

A descriptive study. .............................................................................................................. 55

Rationale. .............................................................................................................................. 55

Interviews. ............................................................................................................................. 56

Data Collection ....................................................................................................................... 57

Research location. ................................................................................................................. 57

Participant selection .............................................................................................................. 58

Interviews. ............................................................................................................................. 60

Field notes. ............................................................................................................................ 61

Journals. ................................................................................................................................ 62

English level.......................................................................................................................... 62

Data Analysis .......................................................................................................................... 62

Transcription. ........................................................................................................................ 63

Naming. ................................................................................................................................. 63

Grouping. .............................................................................................................................. 63
TEENAGERS ABROAD 8

Finding relationships. ............................................................................................................ 63

Displaying. ............................................................................................................................ 64

Research Trustworthiness and Credibility .............................................................................. 64

Role of the researcher. .......................................................................................................... 64

Triangulation. ........................................................................................................................ 65

Ethical Considerations ............................................................................................................ 66

Institutional Review Board (IRB). ........................................................................................ 66

Voluntary participation and consent. .................................................................................... 66

Confidentiality ...................................................................................................................... 68

Summary of the Methodology ................................................................................................ 68

Chapter 4: Summary of Findings .............................................................................................. 70

Individual Students’ Experiences ........................................................................................... 70

Jefferson: I didn't notice a difference until you asked me ....................................................... 73

Life in Jefferson’s home country. ......................................................................................... 73

Deciding to study abroad ...................................................................................................... 74

Jefferson’s English proficiency............................................................................................. 75

Contexts for Learning English. ............................................................................................. 76

Summary. .............................................................................................................................. 81

Irene: You learn it or die ......................................................................................................... 82

Life in Irene’s Home Country. .............................................................................................. 82

Deciding to study abroad. ..................................................................................................... 83

Irene’s English proficiency. .................................................................................................. 84

TEENAGERS ABROAD 9

Learning English. .................................................................................................................. 86

Summary. .............................................................................................................................. 93

Tanja: you can laugh with them .............................................................................................. 93

Life in Tanja’s home country. ............................................................................................... 93

Deciding to study abroad. ..................................................................................................... 95

Tanja’s English proficiency. ................................................................................................. 96

Learning English. .................................................................................................................. 99

Summary. ............................................................................................................................ 105

Julie: You try to blend in and be like the Americans ............................................................ 106

Life in Julie’s home country. .............................................................................................. 106

Deciding to study abroad. ................................................................................................... 107

Julie’s English proficiency. ................................................................................................. 108

Learning English. ................................................................................................................ 110

Summary. ............................................................................................................................ 118

Mia: Because I'm a teenager and here all the teenagers do it ............................................. 119

Life in Mia’s home country. ............................................................................................... 119

Deciding to study abroad. ................................................................................................... 120

Mia’s English proficiency. .................................................................................................. 121

Learning English. ................................................................................................................ 125

Summary. ............................................................................................................................ 132

Secondary Participant Surveys ............................................................................................. 133

Parent survey results. .......................................................................................................... 133

Teacher survey results......................................................................................................... 133

TEENAGERS ABROAD 10

Summary of Findings............................................................................................................ 135

Chapter 5: Analysis and Conclusion ....................................................................................... 138

Theme I – Types of Learning: From Intentional to Peripheral Error! Bookmark not defined.

Revisiting the noticing theory. ...............................................Error! Bookmark not defined.

Learning as a social process. ..................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.

SILL. ......................................................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.

Shift in motivation and intentionality. ...................................Error! Bookmark not defined.

Theme II – Behavior and Identify: shifts and acculturation .... Error! Bookmark not defined.

Discourse markers. .................................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.

Acculturation..........................................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.

Identity in Acculturation. .......................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.

Theme III - COPs: Tools for Language Socialization ............. Error! Bookmark not defined.

Communities of Practice. .......................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.

Trends in COPs. .....................................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.

Willingness to Communicate. ................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.

A note about host families. ....................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.

Implications of this Study ..................................................................................................... 138

Recommendations for foreign language instructors. .......................................................... 147

Recommendations for exchange agencies. ......................................................................... 149

Recommendations for schools hosting exchange students. ................................................ 149

Recommendations for families hosting exchange students. ............................................... 150

Limitations ............................................................................................................................ 150

TEENAGERS ABROAD 11

Recommendations for Future Studies ................................................................................... 151

References .................................................................................................................................. 153

Appendix: Interview Questions and Journals ........................................................................ 168

Interview #1 ........................................................................................................................ 168

Proficiency test and Journal ................................................................................................ 168

Interview #2 ........................................................................................................................ 169

Digital Journal ..................................................................................................................... 169

Interview #3 ........................................................................................................................ 170

TEENAGERS ABROAD 12

Chapter 1

Introduction

This research examines the learning of English as a foreign language by international

high school exchange students in the U.S. High school exchange students are 15 to 18 ½ year-

olds who are staying in the U.S. long-term for the first time (usually one semester or one

academic year), and who are selected by agencies around the world, based on their linguistic

proficiency and maturity level. The agencies select and train host families who can choose a

student to host for one or two semesters, contingent upon the local high school’s approval. In the

high school, students are placed in the regular curriculum for one to two semesters, with or

without English as a Second Language (ESL) support depending on local resources (United

States of America Department of State, 2012). In the U.S., this group has been consistent in size

for the last few years, staying at around 30,000 per year. High school exchange students come

first and foremost from European countries (Poehlman, 2012).

Such endeavors are directly encouraged by political leaders such as Hillary Clinton

(2010) as a bridge between peoples, countries and cultures, promoting peace and mutual respect.

In fact, Clinton focused on overall personal and political benefits of intercultural exchange, and

did not allude to language barriers. Living abroad is often described as one of the best ways to

learn a foreign language as well as to understand a new culture is to go and live abroad.

However, little academic research provides support for these claims made by governments and

agencies that oversee these exchanges or participants and their families. Agencies have primarily

conducted satisfaction surveys focusing on perceived quality of programs and relationships

between students, school and host families (Lee, JaeIn & Council on Standards for International

Educational Travel, 2007). In addition, the focus of academic research has been primarily on
TEENAGERS ABROAD 13

college and university level experiences abroad, and studies of immigrants. These findings,

however, cannot be directly applied to high school exchange students due to key differences.

Primary among these are the number of students in any given area. High schools accept very

limited number of students, and often require that they not speak the same native language as

each other, which creates a small, diverse group within each school and limits opportunities for

using languages other than English. The participants’ countries of origin also differ, namely high

school exchange students are primarily European, whereas post-secondary participants hail

primarily from Asia for (Institute of International Education, 2013). The age of the participants is

another important differing factor to consider, given that they are neither young children nor

legal adults. Finally, the programs’ structures can differ widely, including the extent of the

immersion, alignment with local school curriculum, and last but not least, the type of

accommodation, including homestays.

The researcher was a high school exchange student from Europe to the U.S. in 2002-

2003. In addition to bolstering a general interest the experience of living abroad as a generally

enriching experience, this also shaped the researcher’s academic approach to language learning

and teaching. In particular, it highlighted differences in the researcher’s experience of language

acquisition and that of students in an English for Academic Purposes (EAP) program. As a

former international exchange student and as part of studies in Teaching English as a Second

Language(TESL), the researcher developed this study in the interest of going beyond incidental

observations and of providing an academic understanding how languages are learned.

Role of the Researcher

As in all qualitative research studies, the researcher is highly involved in the study from

its conception to the analysis of results (Rossman & Rallis, 2012). Personal interest and
TEENAGERS ABROAD 14

experience were the researcher’s very first motivators to initiate this study. Having observed

students in pre-academic ESL settings and having known a number of high school exchange

students, casual, empirical observations suggested that the two populations’ patterns of learning

and relationships and interactions with their second language were different. Generally, high

school exchange students displayed less anxiety using English and more ease in interacting in

various social settings. In addition, their speaking appeared to be fluent and native-like more

quickly and effortlessly than that of pre-academic ESL students. Throughout TESL training, the

researcher became curious to know whether the processes by which students learned in a high

school exchange program were different from those utilized by instructors in communicative,

pre-academic ESL programs. The differences between the ages of students, and in some cases,

language proficiency, between high school and university groups being rather minor, and, in

some cases, the countries of origin being the same, the researcher wondered whether other

factors contributed to differences in experiences and achievement.

Need and Significance of this study

This study aims at attaining a certain understanding of processes used to improve

language proficiency. The researcher was able to identify one published academic researcher

who had studied a similar population within an academic framework In her case study, Spenader

(2011), from Saint John’s University and College of Saint Benedict, identified and qualified the

participants’ linguistic achievement and tried to establish relationships between their linguistic

proficiency and specific personality traits. Spenader suggested that future research should

continue to focus on the role of the environment and of identified personality traits in language

acquisition of this population. Other studies suggest that there are significant differences between

classroom style learning and learning in authentic contexts, both in terms of achievement and in
TEENAGERS ABROAD 15

terms of processes being used (Schmidt & Frota, 1986; Bateson, 1994; Norton Peirce, 1995;

Schmidt, 1995; Holopainen & Björkman, 2005; Aguilar-Stewart, 2010; Spenader, 2011; ).

Additionally, a study of learning strategies in a natural setting suggests that the use of such

strategies should receive further academic attention to be better understood and to serve

classroom teaching and learning purposes (Carson & Longhini, 2002). This gap in academic

research contributed to the researcher’s interest in this topic.

The present study will identify some of the key features of language learning choices and

processes in natural settings for a small group of international exchange students. This qualitative

research serves as a starting point for further research into this population. It aims to give some

direction for future studies, identifying themes and distinctive characteristics that may spark

further qualitative and quantitative research. The data found may provide a different

understanding of language learning processes for the purposes of the study of Second Language

Acquisition (SLA). The researcher also hopes to identify language learning features that

encourage further pioneering in the foreign language classroom. Indeed, previously undervalued

authentic context language learning strategies may prove to be essential tools to develop in the

classroom. As another example, some elements of context and language use as it is necessary

outside of the language classroom may be brought into the classroom after analysis of learner’s

experience of authentic context.

Purpose and Description of the Study

The researcher chose a small-scale qualitative study in part because of the gap in

literature, and in part because of practical limitations to larger scale research with this

population. These students each depend on a host family as their temporary guardians, are under

the age of eighteen, and often study in rural areas, with each school hosting a small number of
TEENAGERS ABROAD 16

students. For each participant, a process must be established for communication and data

collection, and consent forms must be reviewed and approved by participants, host parents and

schools. Consequently, reaching a large number of students was not realistic for the researcher at

this time.

The selected participants were a small group of international high school exchange all

attending the same high school. The advantage of this selection, in addition to logistics, was that

the participants lived in the same general area, attended the same school, learned from many of

the same teachers, were offered the same activities and the same type of support. Despite the

differences in their experiences (e.g. their host families, individual classes and choices, among

others), it was generally possible to compare them. In addition, the participants knew each other

and compared themselves to one another. The researcher believes that the participants’ first-hand

knowledge and full immersion in the exchange experience and language, i.e. English, was an

excellent source of qualitative information in context, as generally recommended by literature

(Rossman & Rallis, 2012e). Information gathered primarily came from in-person interviews and

guided written reflections provided by these students during their second semester abroad. The

participants’ sharing and reflecting upon their current experiences are best suited to provide

direct and relevant insight into their language learning processes. However, this type of case

study provides data that cannot be generalized to the broader population.

Other participants helped to provide a different perspective on the exchange students’

behavior. These secondary participants were the students’ host parents, as well as the high school

staff. These groups answered brief open-ended questions about the current group of participants

and their peers, thus contributing to providing an outsider perspective on what the primary
TEENAGERS ABROAD 17

participants relayed. The researcher was able to bring up some of the comments made by these

participants to the students and to note their reactions, thus testing these additional perspectives.

The research question guiding this qualitative study was:

 How do international high school students perceive their own English language

acquisition?

 What do they think helps or hinders their learning in terms of community,

program structure, personality and other factors?

Roadmap of this Study

This study will be broken up into four sections: a review of relevant literature, a detailed

methodology, a comprehensive summary of data, analysis of this data, and a discussion with

implications from the study’s findings. The review of literature will first provide an overview of

high school exchange students in the U.S, and then primarily rely on studies and academic

articles written about college students and adult learners for insight into individual and social

aspects of study abroad experiences as they pertain to language. The final aspect of the review of

literature will survey a few key sociolinguistic elements relevant to the results gathered. The

methodology will include both theoretical and practical elements, referring to the original

proposal to the Institutional Review Board to modifications made necessary by the realities of

the research process. The summary of data gathered will be broken down by participant and into

categories so as to maintain the participants’ stories’ integrity. Finally, the analysis and

discussion will offer a report that will combine the data gathered with insight from the review of

literature, with the intention to draw an educated picture of personal experiences. This section

will open into implications, primarily aiming to encourage further research.

TEENAGERS ABROAD 18

Chapter 2: Literature review

The guiding question for this study is: How do international high school students

perceive their own English language acquisition? What do they think helps or hinders their

learning in terms of community, program structure, personality and other factors? The following

literature review will e first address questions related to high school exchange programs and

context relevant to this study. Second, it will review literature related to how a study abroad

experience affects a person. Among the specific topics explored in this section will be cultural

adjustment, socialization and identity. Some practical programmatic factors affecting language

acquisition will be the subject of the third section, including age, length of exposure, types of

motivation of language learners, and Communities Of Practice (COPs). The final section will

explore the language learners’ tool belt when studying abroad, i.e. some of the predictors of

successful language acquisition, language socialization, the noticing hypothesis, strategies used,

and Willingness to Communicate (WTC). A final section will cover some key discourse markers.

A brief summary of findings will complete the chapter.

High School Exchange Programs

The program in which students are participating will be referred to as study abroad. It

should be noted that this type of study abroad experience differs from widely researched post-

secondary programs in that it is specific to high school students under the age of 18, and in that it

does not necessarily grant students transferable credits.

Exchange programs. International High School exchanges are regulated at many levels,

from the federal level to the program agencies themselves.

Federal level regulations. At the Federal level, the Department of State provides a series

of guidelines required for such programs to be featured on the Department’s official list. The
TEENAGERS ABROAD 19

Department of State oversees visa regulations and is held responsible in case of difficulty with a

visa holder (Lawrence & U.S. Department of State, 2010). The Department of Education also has

a stake in exchange programs and thus provides information to support both students and to

institutions (U.S. Network for Education Information, n.d.).

State and local level regulations. Individual states, school districts and other entities

have in place specific policies and procedures. The Council on Standards for International

Educational Travel (CSIET) provides a reference list that recognizes a total of 1,167 policy-

makers (Council on Standards for International Educational Travel, 2012).

Agencies and responsibilities. Agencies are often referred it as “sponsors” as they

sponsor the incoming student’s visa application (CSIET, 2006). They are bound by the

expectations at several levels. Indeed, agencies must receive approval to work with individual

states, and not all school districts accept international students. Consequently, not all agencies

are able to place students in all areas (U.S. DOS, n.d.). Some of the major agencies include

Rotary Youth Exchange, EF Foundation for Foreign Study, ASSE International Student

Exchange Programs, and Future Leaders Exchange (FLEX).

The following section provides a rough overview of the agencies’ responsibilities to

students, host families, and schools. This information will provide a clearer picture of the

international high school exchange students’ circumstances. These responsibilities are delineated

by the Department of State, the Department of Education, and finally by CSIET.

Agencies verify that participating students are aged fifteen to eighteen and a half when

they start attending school. In addition, students generally must not have graduated from their

home secondary institutions and should not have participated in a long term educational

exchange to the United States previously (CSIET, n.d. b; United States of America Department
TEENAGERS ABROAD 20

of State). In addition, agencies must ensure that students are prepared both in terms of academics

and linguistic competency in order to be successful in regular U.S. classrooms. Finally, agencies

are to guarantee that the students are financially prepared for program participation, and that they

return to their home countries upon its completion (CSIET, n.d. b).

Agencies are to conduct thorough investigations of host families prior to placing students.

All adult members of the family must undergo a criminal background check, and the family must

receive personal letters of recommendations that may not come from the school or the agency

itself (Lawrence & U.S. DOS, 2010). Host families must provide a bed, meals and other basic

living accommodations and must have no more than two international high school exchange

students, provided they are from different countries and language backgrounds (United States of

America Department of State). In addition, host families may not be paid and the agency is

responsible with ensuring that host families are financially prepared for participation. Families

must receive ample information regarding the program and its educational and social goals, “to

further U.S. public diplomacy and foreign policy goals” (Lawrence & U.S. DOS, 2010, p.

65976).

In regards to the student’s school, agencies are to confirm that students are fully enrolled

and do not disrupt the school’s calendar. Students must follow the same rules applicable to

domestic students in terms of participation in any and all extra-curricular activities (Lawrence &

U.S. DOS, 2010). Agencies are expected to maintain monthly contact with host families,

students and schools, and to respond to any concerns. They are to provide the students’ academic

records as well as reports in case of removal from a family or school (Lawrence & U.S. DOS,

2010).
TEENAGERS ABROAD 21

U.S. demographics.

Council on Standards for International Educational Travel (CSIET) statistics. The

CSIET, a U.S. based agency promoting student exchanges, provides the most thorough

information currently available (CSIET, n.d. a). They are recognized for their work. Indeed, both

the Department of State (Lawrence & U.S. DOS, 2010) and the Department of Education

(International Affairs Office, U.S. Department of Education, 2008) refer to their expertise in

their official publications.

Long-term international high school exchange students to the United States. CSIET

defines long-term programs as “exchange programs whose in country duration is longer than

eight weeks” (CSIET, n.d. c, Program Duration Explanation section). According to this resource,

in the academic year 2011-2012 the U.S. hosted some 27,688 international high school

exchange students for year or semester programs (IAO, U.S. DOS, 2008), 3,867 of them living in

the Pacific area covering the states of Washington, California and Oregon. Numbers for the past

nine years reveal ups and downs with overall numbers reaching 29,491 in 2010-2011. The two

graphs below show the number of exchange students hosted in the previous five years, per

region, as well as the world regions represented by high school exchange students, illustrating

that European and Eurasian students are by far the most prominent group. Participants in the

current study are typical, as they are all European.

TEENAGERS ABROAD 22

(Poehlman, 2012)
TEENAGERS ABROAD 23

English as a foreign language. These participants learned English as a foreign language

in their home countries. Carmen Muñoz (2008) compared classroom foreign language learning

and naturalistic immersion language learning, and defines foreign language instruction through

the following characteristics:

 Two to four 50-minute session per week;

 Teacher is often the only source of foreign language exposure with students often

communicating amongst themselves in their first language;

 Quality of teaching and fluency is variable;

 Target language is not used outside the classroom.

Of course, these are generalizations that may or may not reflect the details of each student’s

individual experience prior to studying abroad. The following section will look closely at

individual study abroad experiences.

Programmatic Factors in Language Acquisition During Foreign Sojourn

Age and second language acquisition. In her review of literature, Muñoz (2008) found

that, although older teenagers and adult learners make rapid progress in the first stages of second

language acquisition, their younger counterparts are more likely to achieve native-like

proficiency or higher ultimate attainment. Generally, the Critical Period Hypothesis is used to

describe this phenomenon, Birdsong (2009) explains “in its most succinct and theory-neutral

formulation, the CPH states that there is a limited developmental period during which it is

possible to acquire a language, be it L1 or L2, to normal, nativelike levels” (p. 1). Birdsong’s

(2009) theory states that the ideal age to learn a foreign language is generally prior to puberty

due to decreased neural plasticity later on. However, it is criticized and undermined by empirical

evidence and studies that show significant attainment in adult learners, including Bohn & Munro
TEENAGERS ABROAD 24

(2007). In fact, in conjunction with the age of learners, the amount of time they spent in language

immersion should also be considered. On the other hand, Dewey, Bown, Baker, Gold and Eggett

(2014) found that older learners tend to have the advantage of using their second language

outside of the classroom more than their younger peers.

Length of exposure. Flege and Liu’s 2001 study of the language proficiency of 60 adult

Chinese students and immigrants to the U.S. tested their pronunciation, listening comprehension

and grammatical accuracy and compared the results to the length of stay in the U.S. They suggest

that adults’ proficiency increases with length of exposure if and only if the language

learner/sojourner participates actively in social settings in which there is substantial input from

native speakers of the language.

Flege, Yeni-Komshian and Liu (1999) suggest that, rather than length of exposure,

studies should focus on significance of exposure, i.e. considering the amount of input in the

second language, particularly when compared to the first language. Stevens (2006) explains that

significant exposure amounts to the ability to carry out a number of speech acts over a broad

range of situations and topics, and to contribute to conversations in social settings.

In addition, not all language learners approach language learning with the same amount

or type of motivation, which can affect achievement.

Studies of motivation and investment. It is often said that motivation increases when

the need to master a language skill is pressing. In fact, international exchange students have

different types of motivation when compared to other foreign language learners. Other foreign

language learners may learn a language because it is merely required, or in search of academic

and professional opportunities. By contrast, these individuals are abroad to learn about a culture

and to learn a language which they may need for their future careers but also one that they need
TEENAGERS ABROAD 25

to master in the context of the here and now for social survival. In parallel, it can be

hypothesized that their learning is somewhat unique. A brief overview of what motivation is and

how it affects a learner’s ability to increase their knowledge will provide some background to

understand the learning processes of participants in the present study.

In Wharton’s 2000 survey of learning strategies, participants were split between two

groups: one group was learning Japanese with instrumental motivation whereas the group

studying French had significantly less motivation, and a type of motivation that was more

integrative. “Instrumental motivation references the desire that language learners have to learn a

second language for utilitarian purposes, such as employment, whereas integrative motivation

references the desire to learn a language to integrate successfully with the target language

community” (Norton Peirce, 1995, p. 17).

Wharton (2000) noted a correlation between high overall motivation and use of strategies

in a group of foreign language university students. Other researchers have also noted that

decreased motivation, whether for internal or external reasons, was correlated with a lesser use of

strategies (Carson & Longhini, 2002; Norton & Toohey, 2001).

However, although motivation may be a reasonable predictor for use of strategies, it

alone is an insufficient predictor for success. Indeed, increasingly observations have followed

those by Wagner and Firth (1997) regarding the lack of attention paid to context in the second

language acquisition field, particularly at inter-group and societal levels. Consequently. research

has more recently emphasized that there ought to be more dimensions to successful language

learning than merely individual choices (Norton & Toohey, 2001). Indeed, Savicki, Arrúe, and

Binder’s research (2012) support this hypothesis. In their study comparing study abroad

experiences for 38 mostly junior and senior university students, some with language
TEENAGERS ABROAD 26

requirements, and some without, they found that although individual factors play a part in

cultural and social adaptation in study abroad, other factors also play an important role. These

factors include how easily foreign students can join host activities, as well as cultural distance

between the cultures.

Norton Peirce’s 1995 and 2000 studies of several migrant workers in Canada shows that

positive individual learning choices and attitudes can be countered by environmental factors that

they may have little control over. She argues that the concept of motivation in the field of SLA is

insufficient as it does not reflect the complexity involved in the interaction between identity,

social power and language learning. Norton suggests that the term investment is better suited to

explore the various layers of individuals’ relationships to second language acquisition.

Investment describes and accounts for the language learner in his or her of a multifaceted

sociocultural identity and with his or her various desires, all of which are in tension with one

another and ever-evolving (Norton Peirce, 1995; ).

One of the issues faced by these migrants is that they seemed to be unable to gain access

to groups of Canadian nationals that would recognize them as equals. Norton Peirce’s study

(1995) is very clear: this inability to penetrate these groups is not due to lack of investment or

lack of effort; indeed it has to do with the complex dynamics of groups, particularly when

foreign nationals enter the equation as in the case in the current study.

Communities of Practice (COPs) and Legitimate Peripheral Participation (LPP).

Second Language Acquisition (SLA) literature takes on several different approaches to non-

native speakers’ interactions with native speakers in study abroad contexts. For this research, two

of the most common hypotheses are explored; communities of practice and legitimate peripheral

participation.
TEENAGERS ABROAD 27

Communities of Practice (COPs). Etienne Wenger-Trayner (2006) is well known in the

study of communities of practice (COP), and identifies them through three key elements:

domain, practice, and community. Community suggests that a group of people must develop

relationships through time and interactions. Domain suggests that the COP members should all

share an interest in a specific field or area of knowledge or experience. Non-COP members may

not recognize this domain or its members as experts in that field for it to be a valid COP.

Wenger-Trayner suggests that COP members experience and explore their domain actively,

including through the identification of shared resources, hence the last key word, practice. The

result is a group of people who take part in collective learning and creation of knowledge

(Wenger-Trayner, 2006). Additionally, COPs are ever-changing, and membership into one COP

does not automatically prevent membership into another. In a high school, COPS might be

“jocks” or “burnouts” as proposed by Davies (2005, p. 575), though in this case, these are

mutually exclusive. The high school exchange students in this study, as any students and social

beings, found their place in COPs, which affected their experiences significantly.

Legitimate Peripheral Participation (LPP) and legitimacy. Bethan Davies’s 2005 review

provides an overview of Wenger’s assessment of the different modes of participation into

communities of practice. The four different modes of participation are: full participation,

peripheral participation, marginal participation and non-participation. Full participation requires

participation in the full breadth of activities of the COP, and maintains an insider trajectory. Non-

participation is the polar opposite, i.e. the complete absence of participation.

Peripheral participation into a community of practice is participation that is not complete

and absolute. However, there is often an inbound trajectory associated with this position: the

person is learning and earning his or her way to full participation. Nevertheless, peripheral
TEENAGERS ABROAD 28

participation may also be maintained without inbound trajectory, but the possibility for full

participation should always exist. If the possibility of full participation disappears, peripheral

participation gives way to marginal participation.

If the possibility for full participation disappears, then the person has fallen into marginal

participation, i.e. one where complete access is denied. The COP’s practice, definition of

community or domain may marginalize a person, who may or may not be able to earn legitimacy

into said COP (Davies, 2005; Wenger, 1998). In other words, participation into a community of

practice’s activities does not equal legitimacy within it. Legitimacy as described by Davies

(2005) therefore, is “being allowed in a safe environment in which to make mistakes, and

gradually extend and normalize your practice” (p. 567).

It should be added that Lave and Wenger’s (1991) observations confirm Davies’ (2005)

observation that mere participation without legitimacy often does not foster learning. Legitimacy

is tied to the concepts of full, peripheral and marginal participation; it is the pre-requisite that

grants marginal, peripheral or full access to a COP (Davies, 2005; Lave & Wenger, 1991). In a

series of analyses of her own qualitative studies of adult immigrant women in English-speaking

Canada, Bonny Norton-Peirce (1995) observed that opportunities for second language practice in

a study abroad context are not simply the product of the language learner’s effort, as was

sometimes assumed in the field of second language acquisition. Indeed, this was prominent in

studies of good language learners, where ultimate proficiency was thought to be only the result

of individual traits, choices and practices. In fact, she argues that opportunities and therefore

success are very much tied to the host communities of practice’s willingness to grant access and

legitimacy to the language learner (Norton Peirce, 1995; Norton & Toohey, 2001). The
TEENAGERS ABROAD 29

participants in the present study expressed concerns over their legitimacy within their school

groups.

Gate-keeping and the Communities of Practice (COPs).Although communities of

practice theory does not provide much insight into gate-keeping processes and hierarchy within

COPs (Davies, 2005), Penelope Eckert’s 2000 study of dynamics in a high school in the United

Kingdom provides some insights into the workings of high school communities. She observed

that adolescent members of a community of practice are well aware of the members who exert

power over the rest of the group (Eckert, 2000).

In addition, this same study, Eckert (2000) suggests that at least some marginalized

adolescents struggle to understand why they cannot seem to gain an inbound trajectory into a

particular group (or COP), despite their efforts to make friends. In other words, the mechanism

and rules that determine participation versus marginalization are not always obvious to

marginalized groups.

Learning in the Community of Practice (COP). Wenger’s 1998 book on COPs takes a

“social perspective on learning” (p. 226). Some of the relevant aspects of learning are that, first,

humans cannot help but learn because “learning is fundamentally experiential and fundamentally

social” (p. 227). Taking part in COPs is therefore both an inherent human need and a means to

learn continuously through social engagement centered on a common domain. Members of COPs

all contribute to the creation and diffusion of knowledge (Wenger, 1998). This concept will

prove central to the participants’ experience of learning oral English skills among their host

communities.

Groups and communities in study abroad. Although it is an older study, Bochner,

McLeod and Lin’s 1977 work is still relevant today. Their research analyzed international and
TEENAGERS ABROAD 30

domestic students at the University of Hawai’i, and started a discussion on friendship networks

in study abroad. Bochner et al. suggested three networks: the primary mono-cultural network

made up of co-nationals, the secondary bi-national network, made up of host nationals, and the

least salient network, the tertiary multi-national network composed of other foreign nationals.

These friendship networks have later been used to identify acculturative processes and outcomes,

as will be reviewed in the following sections (Jiang, Green, Henley, & Masten, 2009; Ward &

Rana-Deuba, 1999).

It should also be noted that research shows that foreigners often encounter difficulties

creating strong bonds with Americans. “Whether they are immigrants or sojourners, they arrive

in the U.S. with a clear intention of making new USAer friends, and initially at least, respond

very positively to the open, friendly demeanor of many USAers. But after a time, they feel

something is missing. Their friendly overtures aren’t returned in ways they think of as

constituting friendship” (Baumgarte, 2014, p. 191). Baumgarte also adds that Americans tend to

build friendships slowly, and focus on fun in the early stages of friendship development.

Beyond these friendship networks, international exchange students take part in classroom

activities that differ from the foreign language classroom setting. The following section provides

a few insights into the parameters and advantages of learning a foreign language in a foreign

country, with a formal classroom or classroom-like setting.

Language Learning Processes in Foreign Sojourn

Beyond the foreign language classroom. Wilkinson’s (2002) case studies of students

participating in study abroad in France revealed that students and their hosts found themselves in

teacher-student like situations. Given this reliance on interaction styles learned in the classroom,

these relationships sometimes were not perceived as natural or comfortable for the participants as
TEENAGERS ABROAD 31

it was perceived as unnatural. In general, study abroad participants hope for more relationships

and conversations that they find more natural.

Studies comparing proficiency gains between foreign language classroom learners and

those studying abroad yield interesting results that may shed some light into the experience of

immersion. Kinginger (2008) found that study abroad participants’ skills increased, if unevenly

among the group, including in academic proficiency, language awareness, and pragmatic

competence. Segalowitz, Freed, Collentine, Lafford, Lazar, and Diaz-Campos (2004) found that

students in study abroad increased their oral proficiency markedly, including by their ability to

hold conversations without resorting to disruptive strategies. However, this improvement is not

attributed solely to increased interactions with native speakers. In fact, in the case of interactions

with host families, results suggested that these were formulaic and brief, thus leading to limited

learning opportunities. The same year, Segalowitz and Freed observed that students in study

abroad decrease self-monitoring while their ability to speak faster increases.

In a comparison between six different study abroad programs, a group of researchers

(Dewey et al., 2014) found that the primary predictor of language use outside the classroom was

the program’s requirement to have outside the classroom contact with native speakers. This was

done through volunteer activities or the requirement to report and reflect upon two hours per day

of conversations in the second language outside the class. In addition, they found that language

proficiency did not predict the amount of contact with domestic peers, although the researchers

deduced that the type and depth of contact differed. This is in agreement with Gallagher’s (2013)

findings.

The above-mentioned studies, however, are all based on tightly structured study abroad

experiences. On the other hand, Schmidt and Frota (1986) is one of few case studies of
TEENAGERS ABROAD 32

developing conversational ability in context, outside of a highly controlled program. This is

reminiscent of the high school exchange experience, although the participants in the present

study are much younger and the specifics of the context differ greatly. Some key findings include

that, although formal instruction was perceived by this linguist as very beneficial, not all that was

taught was noticed. Instead, classroom learning provided opportunities for easily accessible

answers to his grammatical questions. Informal conversations were far more instructional.

Although the case study participant and linguist believed noticing was necessary to learning,

examination of the data revealed it was only required for classroom-style learning. In addition,

the authors suggest that the learner’s acquisition process may be influenced by his or her own

priorities, regardless of outside input (Schmidt & Frota, 1986).

Hernández’s 2010 research on study abroad participants showed that 10 out of 20

participants found it difficult to interact with native speakers. Rather, many of them also

attributed their gains in oral proficiency to interactions with their host families.

A study of U.S. students studying abroad for a period of three months found that

language proficiency prior to arrival into the host country may not predict cultural and social

adaptation (Savicki, Arrúe, & Binder, 2009). In fact, it is suggested that that students whose

analytic thinking leads to high language proficiency may also be hindered by their attention to

syntax in social contexts. On the other hand, students with high practical thinking may be able to

use more limited language skills with less restriction from analytical thinking, leading to greater

social opportunities abroad. In addition, strong attachment to home-country identity appeared to

be correlated with lesser cultural adaptation in the host country. Other studies, as discussed in the

section about acculturation, Spenader (2011) demonstrated that cultural adjustment and ultimate

attainment in foreign language are correlated.

TEENAGERS ABROAD 33

The following study is the most extensive study of high school and gap-year students

(between secondary and post-secondary education) that research into academic literature yielded.

It provides some insight into the level of linguistic achievement that these students can achieve,

which will give more depth to Savicki, et al.’s findings (2009).

A study of high school foreign exchange. Allison Spenader (2011) followed the lives of

four pre-collegiate gap year students from the United States who attended Swedish high schools

for one academic year. Each student was placed in a different school and therefore a different

environment. They were also absolute beginners. These case studies gathered both quantitative

and qualitative information with an aim to better understand their language gains, the

acculturative outcomes achieved and their relation to language learning, and the role of program

design and personality. Spenader found that absolute beginners are not necessarily at a

disadvantage in terms of language acquisition, and that these four participants found that

mainstream classrooms offered richer learning environments than did second language

classrooms. A positive relationship to their host families, and the participants’ ability to find a

balance between home culture identity and host culture identity, appeared to predict higher

language learning and well-being, while other outcomes could be linked to lower linguistic

achievement and an overall more negative experience. Students also benefitted greatly from

access to public transportation, which granted them a degree of autonomy. Personality traits that

support language learning include sense of humor and assertiveness (Spenader, 2011). Beyond

these traits, others are thought to remarkably increase language acquisition.

These findings are extremely relevant, as they provide a point of comparison for the

experiences of the participants in the present study. Indeed they are the same age, and the
TEENAGERS ABROAD 34

program structure remarkably similar. Consequently, findings related to host families and

personality in particular will be compared to that of the five participants in this study.

Characteristics of language learners. Aguilar Stewart’s 2010 study of eight study

abroad university students identified that the following characteristics of language learning in

immersion affect language learning in study abroad:

 Personality traits, as they contribute to the ability or inability to take part in the new

social environment;

 Willingness to initiate conversation with native speakers (which was found to be linked

to personality), insofar as they encourage or hinder willingness to initiate conversation;

 Cultural conventions, insofar as they allow or prevent adaptation to these different norms

and the development of a context-appropriate identity, also affected by the student’s

personality;

 Reflection, through journaling in this case, insofar as it encourages participants to

become increasingly aware of their learning processes (p.153).

Nevertheless, as was alluded to in the previous section on socialization, language acquisition

in sojourn does not solely depend on the language learner’s personality and choices.

Language socialization theory. Watson-Gegeo and Nielsen (2003) propose a

multidisciplinary view of language acquisition that brings together traditional cognitivist and

sociocuturalist theories. Note that, in this essay, they list and analyze studies in language

socialization based exclusively on classroom foreign language education, which is not directly

relevant to the present study. This research suggests that the theories of language socialization

ought to be tested and observed in contexts that are culturally authentic and linguistically
TEENAGERS ABROAD 35

challenging. An environment like that of high school exchange students observed in this case

study might be considered an ideal setting for future studies.

Watson-Gegeo and Nielsen (2003) argue that cognitivist and socioculturalist approaches

to SLA offer different and complementary perspectives of language acquisition. Underlying is

the conclusion that academic disciplines have come to agree that neither nature nor culture alone

can explain language development and acquisition. They explain that "cognition originates in

social interaction. Constructing new knowledge is therefore both a cognitive and a social

process" (p.156). They also argue that in first and second language acquisition alike, linguistic

and cultural knowledge are assimilated together, and depend upon one another. They argue that

language is "integrated in sociocultural behavior" (p. 163). In addition, they do not make the

same distinction as Krashen (1976) between learning and acquisition. In fact, they add that adults

and children alike play an active role in both the cognitive and the social aspect of linguistic and

cultural acquisition, which they perceive as a whole, undivided experience (Watson-Gegeo,

2004).

Watson-Gegeo (2004) adds that the interconnectedness of cognitive and social aspects of

language imply that the political and historical milieu in which a language event takes place play

an important role in its development. One hypothesis of cognitive theory that may be strongly

tied to socioculturalist theory and that will be key in the present study is the noticing hypothesis.

The noticing hypothesis. Schmidt’s (1995) Noticing Hypothesis suggests that noticing is

indeed necessary for language acquisition, and that it amounts to conscious awareness of

grammar. In his 1995 review, he summarizes this theory: “what learners notice in input is what

becomes intake for learning,” where noticing requires both focal attention and awareness (p. 20).
TEENAGERS ABROAD 36

Truscott (1998) proposes a version of the Noticing Hypothesis that distinguishes what can be

acquired consciously and what cannot. “The acquisition of metalinguistic knowledge is tied to

(conscious) noticing; development of competence is not,” therefore distinguishing “competence

and metalinguistic knowledge” (p. 124).

However, further review of Schmidt’s 1995 document also suggests that noticing may be

more complex than it may appear. Many different theories are explored, including two that are

particularly relevant to this study. First, the idea of subliminal perception. This theory suggests

that one may detect something (that can belong to the cognitive or social psychological realm)

without being aware of it. Schmidt also suggests that no learning seems to come from such

subliminal processes but that rather, they activate pre-existing mental structures. The same

document reviews the theory of implicit memory, whereby participants cannot recall previous

experiences. Whether they can recall the previous experience does not necessarily mean that they

will not be able to utilize the past experience when it becomes useful. For example, participants

may not be able to recall hearing or seeing a word in the past, but they will likely be able to

identify and understand it more easily than brand new words.

Academic literature has generally dedicated a lot of attention to more easily identifiable

strategies of language learning, both in classroom and in authentic contexts. The following

inventory is a thorough list of actions one can consciously undertake to improve his or her

language skills. This list will then be compared to the language learning experience of the

participants in the present study to identify similarities and differences.

Strategy Inventory for Language Learning (SILL). Although immigrants and

foreigners resort to similar learning strategies as do foreign language learners, the context in

which their experience takes places shapes their choices and opportunities. More specifically,
TEENAGERS ABROAD 37

their language is embedded in their social worlds, those where language ability will be not

typically tested formally and where the majority of learning takes places through informal

processes, particularly conversation (Norton Peirce, 1995; Norton, 2000). In addition, this paper

is concerned with other social and psychological factors that may affect the participants’ learning

opportunities and success, as will be explored through their stories and experiences of learning.

In the past twenty years or so, there has been a growing interest in understanding what

methods successful language learners used to attain high proficiency. An overview of these

universal techniques is relevant because each of these strategies is a tool available to language

learners regardless of whether they receive formal instruction. Learning strategies are a series of

single techniques that a language learner may more or less consciously use to aid their progress.

They can be influenced by learning styles, i.e. overarching and relatively stable preferences of

individuals such as introversion vs. extroversion or visual learning vs. oral learning. They can

also be influenced by individual educational contexts and language needs (Carson & Longhini,

2002; Tahriri & Divsar, 2011). The Strategy Inventory for Language Learning (SILL) compiles

all these strategies into a widely used test, which is broken down into six general categories

(Brown, 2007; Carson & Longhini, 2002; Oxford & Burry-Stock, 1995; Wharton, 2000). For

each strategy, a Likert scale is provided to gauge a learner’s reported use of the strategy. The

following section is a summary of each category of strategies from Brown and directly from

Rebecca Oxford’s SILL (Brown, 2007; Oxford & Burry-Stock, 1995) as well as examples from a

study by Joan Carson and Ana Longhini (2002). Through the SILL and journal entries, these

researchers analyzed the Joan Carson’s use of strategies for learning Spanish during an

immersion in Argentina, thus providing real-life examples that are highly relevant to this study.

Notable differences between this research and the present study include that the participant is an
TEENAGERS ABROAD 38

adult, specializing in the field of linguistics and education, whose focus was to highlight the use

of strategies in an immersion context (Carson & Longhini, 2002).

SILL: direct strategies. The six categories are themselves organized into direct and

indirect strategies. Direct strategies have to do with making the most of language exchanges

when they are happening and are broken down into: memorization, cognitive and compensation

strategies. Memorization strategies are methods used by the learner to try and remember a certain

word or structure (Brown, 2007). Carson provides examples when she focuses on visualizing the

spelling of new words in order to remember them more easily (Carson & Longhini, 2002). The

second category consists of cognitive strategies. These have to do with the learner’s ability to

make the most of learning opportunities as they arise through analyzing and practicing the use of

messages and structures (Brown, 2007). Some of Carson and Longhini’s examples include

“unpackaging” structures or noticing the gender of new or known vocabulary in conversations

(2002, p. 418). Third, compensation strategies involve the learner’s ability to identify holes in his

or her interlanguage and to make up for it when negotiating meaning, especially in conversation

(Brown, 2007). Carson suggested that she often resorted to gestures such as showing numbers

with her hands to get her message across (Carson & Longhini, 2002). In all of these instances,

Carson found ways to cope with the learning opportunities that present themselves to her in the

form of conversations.

SILL: indirect strategies. Indirect strategies, are focused on creating learning

opportunities and expanding on those that have taken place. They are broken down into

metacognitive, affective and social strategies. Metacognitive strategies create opportunities for

learning by planning for them, by evaluating interactions and by bringing prior knowledge into

linguistic exchanges (Brown, 2007). For example, Carson sometimes organized lists of words as
TEENAGERS ABROAD 39

a response to a conversation (Carson & Longhini, 2002). Affective strategies require the

learner’s awareness of his or her own emotional blocks to learning and addressing these before

and during target language interaction (Brown, 2007). Carson demonstrated awareness of her

discomfort with people whom she did not know personally but she did not report strategies of

planning such conversations or of encouraging herself mentally to lower her own affective filter

(Carson & Longhini, 2002). Finally, social strategies highlight others as a resource for language

and cultural input and through negotiation of meaning (Brown, 2007). Carson did this when she

connected with her host through daily conversations about cultural differences (Carson &

Longhini, 2002). Thus a learner who resorts to many indirect strategies consciously plans his or

her learning by using indirect strategies that can expand the number of opportunities and broaden

the scope of what can be learned from each one.

Bedrock strategies. However, not all language learning strategies are used equally,

especially in naturalistic settings. Tahriri and Divsar (2011) list ten strategies that he considers

to be essential to any language learning situations. Although they note that not all language

learners report using learning strategies, Wharton’s 2000 study confirms the use of ten bedrock

strategies by successful college-age language learners. They are listed as:

 Imitate way native speakers talk (cognitive)

 Use familiar words in different ways (cognitive)

 Initiate conversations in L2 (cognitive)

 Watch TV/films, listen to radio in L2 (cognitive)

 Read for pleasure in L2 (cognitive)

 Have clear goals for language learning (metacognitive)

 Look for people to talk to in L2 (metacognitive)

TEENAGERS ABROAD 40

 Encourage self to speak when afraid (affective)

 Practice with other students (social)

 Ask questions to maintain dialogue (social)

Five of these strategies are cognitive, two are metacognitive, Carson’s favored category in her

study (Carson & Longhini, 2002), one is affective, and two are social. In addition, this study

hypothesizes that memory strategies’ use decreases with the learner’s advancement (Wharton,

2000). Note that this study was carried out in a university where students were mainly exposed to

foreign language in an academic setting, which could explain why compensation strategies are

not favored. Because only two of these bedrock strategies are not directly communicative, most

of these bedrock strategies are directly applicable to naturalistic language learning contexts. In

fact, Carson suggests that emphasis on oral conversation characterizes immersion situations

(Carson & Longhini, 2002).

However, SILL does not account for the full breadth of factors accounted for by the

socialization theory outlined previously. WTC provides some information as to the connections

between some of these strategies and factors both within (consciously and unconsciously) and

beyond each individual learner.

Willingness to Communicate (WTC). The present study inevitably focuses on oral

skills, as the participants are most often expected to use said skills throughout their program. The

purpose of this section is to better understand an essential aspect of oral communication

particularly relevant to non-native speakers, as well as to provide some bases for understanding

what helps or hinders the participants’ learning.

Foreign language anxiety is very specific to a foreign language, and is particularly

noticeable in listening and speaking (Horwitz, Horwitz, & Cope, 1986). In 1986, Horwitz, et al.
TEENAGERS ABROAD 41

explained that “any performance in the L2 is likely to challenge an individual’s self-concept as a

competent communicator and lead to reticence, self-consciousness, fear or even panic” (1986, p.

128). Simplistic approaches to WTC suggest that it is merely the culmination of interaction

between language anxiety and language confidence or motivation. However, MacIntyre’s (2007)

more recent approach to the subject suggests that the study of WTC should consider that much

literature of second language acquisition does not account for situations like that of “an

experienced learner who is unwilling to communicate” but who “might show both high

motivation for learning and high anxiety about communicating” in the second language

(MacIntyre, 2007, p. 564). The following model is foundational in that it provides an in-depth

analysis of WTC in all its layers, and provides hypotheses for a wide range of situations.

A model of WTC. MacIntyre, Clément, Dörnyei and Noels’s (1998) model treats WTC as

the culmination of factors that take place at a multitude of levels and that lead to specific events,

as illustrated in the following model. Indeed, an individual act of speaking in a second language

(Layer I) is seen as the result of interaction between factors ranging from social context to

intention to speak or maintain conversation in a specific instance.

The bottom layer in the proposed model goes as far as to consider personality and

intergroup climate, suggesting that not all groups or individuals will be on an equal footing

beyond the point of any given interaction or interaction opportunity. Indeed, level of historical

contact between groups and their structural characteristics are to be considered. Affective and

cognitive contexts (Layer V), including more micro-elements of social relations such as gender

or age, alter the elements in layer VI. Communicative competence in the second language is also

grouped with these components.

TEENAGERS ABROAD 42

These two context layers are in turn filtered through group tendencies including various

forms of motivation, plus language confidence which is both affective and cognitive (Layer IV).

Above it are state level considerations related to the relations and motivation for communication

between individuals, including desire for affiliation and control motives, as well as current

communicative self-confidence.. These characteristics lead directly to the desire to speak (layer

II), which may or may not be reflected in actual communication behavior (Layer I).

Figure from MacIntyre et al., 1998, p. 547.

This construct offers the possibility to study language behavior as the result of both

cognitive and social factors. As made obvious by this description, willingness to communicate

cannot be seen as simply the result of an individual’s L2 confidence, motivation or anxiety or

event simply power of will, but as one that should be integrated in the larger social context of

any given event (MacIntyre, 2007).

TEENAGERS ABROAD 43

Empirical studies of WTC. Gallagher’s (2013) study of over 100 Chinese students at a

British University found that, “although L2 proficiency is essential for establishing a functional

person-environment fit, it is the effective, voluntary use of the L2 which is the deciding factor”

(p.66) thereby confirming the importance of WTC. Nevertheless, it should be noted that the

study also found a direct link between low confidence in the second language and

communication difficulties. In addition, Clément, Baker and MacIntyre (2003) found that

increased L2 confidence was a sign of effortless use of the second language.

Reinders and Wattana (2014) evaluated the effect of participating in a video game using

the second language on their foreign language students’ WTC. Participants displayed increased

willingness to use the second language to express opinions, diminished L2 anxiety, and less

concern about making mistakes throughout the experiment, as they focused on the online game

environment and objectives.

Yashima and Zenuk-Nishide’s 2008 comparative studies of study abroad versus foreign

language education in high school English language learners provides interesting insight in terms

of how WTC is affected by a 10-month study abroad experience in an English speaking country

of their choice. Students who study abroad for an academic year showed greater improvement,

and this gap was maintained over a three year duration, when compared with stay-at-home

students in terms of development of English proficiency, willingness to communicate in English,

and frequency of communication in English. Thus WTC can improve over time, and study

abroad experiences appear to be well suited to develop it.

The concept of WTC itself reiterates that, although there are many individual aspects to

second language acquisition, they are far from being sufficient or isolated. In fact, particularly in

the context of this study, the social aspects of language are equally important. In fact, Gallagher
TEENAGERS ABROAD 44

(2013) found a connection between high WTC and positive adaptation to cultural stressors of the

study abroad experience. The last section of this literature review will cover a specific area to

which the participants in the present study were introduced. This will allow the various theories

in this literature review to come together in the last chapter to begin to analyze the phenomenon

of the acquisition of discourse markers.

Characteristics of Successful Foreign Sojourn

In the Psychology of Culture Shock, Ward, Bochner and Furnham (2001) defined sojourn

as a stay of six months to five years in a foreign country that is also voluntary and often has a

clearly stated goals (p. 142). Thus high school foreign exchange students in this study will be

referred to as participants and students, but can equivalently be referred to as sojourners. In

parallel, study abroad and sojourn will be used interchangeably. Suring foreign sojourn, a

number of changes occur beyond language learning. All these factors, including identity,

acculturation, and socialization and adjustment, are impossible to separate from the language

learning experience of the present study’s participants.

Identity. Bateson’s 1995 extensive review of foreign sojourn provides a definition of

identity that it is appropriate for this study. Identity is seen as multi-faceted and is anchored in

others and in interaction (p. 65), as supported by Benson, Barkhuizen, Bodycott, and Brown’s

review (2012). Further, being exposed to another culture threatens one’s concept of self in that

one is expected to leave certainty of one’s knowledge and confidence behind to embrace a new

ambiguity and take a chance art changing (pp. 65-67). Later on, she explains that learning

amounts to developing appropriate survival skills when brought to foreign circumstances. In the

case of foreign sojourn, it even requires losing status (p. 71). Benson et al. (2012) summarize that

this type of second language identity is specific to environments that require use of the second
TEENAGERS ABROAD 45

language in daily life, such as study abroad experience. Angulo (2008) also found that living

arrangements and social behaviors had an impact on the identity changes of study abroad

participants.

For teenagers, whose identity is still being defined, this is a particularly interesting shift.

Brown and Brown (2009) carried out an ethnographic study of international students’ adjustment

through the lens of existential analysis rooted in psychotherapy. The study was based on

interviews with thirteen students from as many different countries for a period of twelve months,

plus field observations of the 150-participant cohort. Their findings suggest that participating in

a medium- to long-term experience abroad is an opportunity for self-discovery. The experience

of being confronted to a different culture and to establish new routines creates the need to be

confronted with oneself in a different way, and can be seen as a challenge to self-identify. The

stress caused by the experience abroad can be either an opportunity for tremendous growth or a

blow to the self from which one struggles to recover (p. 357).

The confrontation of an individual with difference as can be found during foreign sojourn

leads to inevitable change and adaptation of the self. The present study’s case study are not

immune to this process, nor does can it be isolated from their language learning development.

Another relevant study is that of Ellwood and Nakane’s (2008) where they interviewed

Japanese students in Australian ESL and academic classrooms, as well as their teachers, on the

topic of oral participation. They noted that all groups see the Japanese students’ tendency to

remain silent during class in maladapted to the Australian context. Most importantly, they

observed that the Japanese students found themselves both in disagreement with the host

country’s classroom culture, while also exploring strategies to adapt to it. Some of the strategies

they used included specializing in a subject where they felt competent, preparing speech acts
TEENAGERS ABROAD 46

before class time and getting to know the instructor outside the classroom. These strategies

allowed students to remain true to values they hold (for example, not wanting to ask content

questions of the answers can be found in the textbook) while still adapting to their new

surroundings. This is what the authors refer to as a “third space identity” (p. 222).

The Process of Acculturation. Adjustment to the host culture is reported (Spenader,

2011) to affect language learners’ language learning progress curve and outcomes. It is

hypothesized in this study that the learning process may also be affected by acculturation.

Psychologist John Berry (1997) has studied acculturation extensively. He defines it as

“the general processes and outcomes (both cultural and psychological) of intercultural contact”

(p. 8). Acculturation is therefore both a personal psychological journey that involves redefining

oneself in relation to home and host cultures, and that is affected that the host culture’s

sociocultural attitude to diversity. Acculturation is associated with acculturative stress, i.e.

uncertainty, anxiety and depression normally associated with transition into a new culture.

Berry’s ABC approach to acculturation (1997) proposes to study this concept from three

separate angles: affective (A) based on social psychology, behavior (B) from social and

experimental psychology, and cognition (C) ethnic and cross-cultural social psychology.

Therefore, angle A looks at stress caused by cross-cultural travel, along with personal and

situational support that may counteract the effect of this stress. Angle B looks at culturally

relevant social skills and the sojourner’s knowledge and learning of these skills, including

language and communicative competence. Angle C focuses on cultural and group-related

identity in relations to the sojourner’s and host’s attitudes toward and knowledge of one another.

It is suggested that examination of all three of these variables at both micro (individual) and
TEENAGERS ABROAD 47

macro (larger society) levels can account for most or all of the aspects of acculturation (Zhou,

Jindal-Snape, Topping, & Todman, 2008).

Berry (1997), as a foundational researcher of acculturation and acculturative outcomes,

describes the four major outcomes of acculturation used in Spenader’s 2011 study. Assimilation

is achieved when an individual completely embraces the host culture, to the expense of home

culture. Separation is its opposite, i.e. an individual rejecting the host culture and reinforcing

affiliation with home culture. Integration is achieved when an individual is able to embrace both

home culture and events and networks of the host culture. Marginalization is the loss of interest

in both home and host culture Spenader’s (2011) study of gap year students determined that

separation was certainly not beneficial outcome for language acquisition, whereas assimilation

and integration were linked to positive outcomes. Although the present study does not go in such

depth as to identify the specific outcome achieved by the participants, this overview will provide

a frame of reference for the cultural adjustment process of the participants alongside their

language learning.

Jiang, Green, Henley and Masten’s 2009 study of Chinese students attending graduate

programs in the United States provide additional insight. Personal and background information

collection, acculturation measures, and proficiency interviews were carried out so as to establish

relationships between second language acquisition and acculturation. Jiang et al. suggest that

separation from their ethnic and cultural heritage is not necessary to achieve positive results in

the acculturative process. They suggested that the more sojourners are immersed in the host

culture, regardless of ties with their home culture, the higher their level of proficiency. They also

suggest that immersion in host groups provides social and emotional support needed to deal with

acculturative stress and therefore increases opportunities for learning (Jiang et al., 2009; Ward et
TEENAGERS ABROAD 48

al., 2001). Social aspects of the experience abroad are hypothesized to be relevant factors

affecting the learning experience of participants in the present study.

On the other hand, Ward and Rana-Deuba’s 1999 study of adaptation and acculturation of

over a hundred adult foreign residents in Nepal showed that identification with co-nationals was

linked to lower psychological difficulties, while identification with host nationals was tied with

fewer social difficulties. In addition, they support the hypothesis that an integrative outcome in

the acculturative process, i.e. whereby a balance is found between home and host cultural

identities, is the acculturative outcome that reduces stress and anxiety most effectively. Overall,

the researchers found that both proximity to host culture and integrative acculturative outcome

show the greatest promise of both psychological and sociocultural adjustment. It should be noted

that, in this study, not all foreign nationals spoke the local language, and therefore language

proficiency was not measured.

Socialization and adjustment. Community and acculturation being aspects of the study

abroad experience that are hypothesized to affect the learning process of the study’s participants,

it is relevant to review the relationships between these two factors.

In a recent large-scale study of Belgian teenage exchange students (median ˂ 18 years

old), Geeraert, Demoulin, and Demes (2014) found that, in the first stages of international

sojourn, quality contact as defined and perceived by participants is extremely important in the

adjustment process, regardless of whether the contact is with host nationals or fellow

international students. However, they also found that, in the long run, it is beneficial to develop

quality relationships with host nationals, whereas continued relationships with co-nationals may

hinder adjustment and increase stress. Ying and Han’s 2006 study also suggests that an

extroverted personality prior to the departure of their Taiwanese participants to undertake

TEENAGERS ABROAD 49

graduate studies in the U.S. predicts better adjustment. A study of adult professional expatriates’

ability to adjust also suggests that good communication ability is among the most reliable

predictors of successful adjustment abroad (Holopainen & Björkman, 2005).

In 2008, Yashima and Zenuk-Nishide researched the linguistic and social benefits of

study abroad in a quantitative study of 165 high school students who spent an academic year

abroad. They assessed the students’ international posture (i.e. interest in the host culture),

Willingness To Communicate (WTC, which will be studied in detail in a later section),

adjustment variables, motivation to learn, as well as the frequency and duration of interactions

with friends and host families. This descriptive, quantitative study of foreign sojourn found the

following relevant results. Overall interest in host culture and activities appear to positively

affect motivation and adjustment. Motivation and WTC are strongly correlated. There was a

strong correlation between amount of time spent with host family and overall adjustment. WTC

prior to departure is associated with more and longer interactions with hosts during study abroad

and with satisfaction with host families. However, it does not correlate with making friends. In

addition, it should be noted that all participants in the study saw their overall WTC increase over

the course of their English education (Yashima & Zenuk-Nishide, 2008).

In a 2004 study, Yashima and colleagues found similar results in terms of WTC,

frequency of communication and time spent with host nationals. In this study, they also suggest

that “the sojourner’s WTC might result in behavior that invites hosts to interact with the

sojourner more extensively.” In other words, the action of initiating speech may encourage

dialogue, which may increase to chance for future dialogues, including initiated by the native

speaker (Yashima, Zenuk-Nishide, & Shimizu, 2004).

TEENAGERS ABROAD 50

Beyond an individual’s ability to adjust to a new culture, other programmatic aspects of

foreign sojourn affect the learner. Indeed, it is hypothesized in this study that not all foreign

situations are alike, starting with the age of the sojourner, all the way to the number and quality

of Communities of Practice (COPs) available.

Relevant Discourse Markers

Because of the age of the participants in this study, special consideration is given to

aspects of their social and linguistic life that is particular to their situation. As a significant

sociolinguistic trait of speech among American high school students in general (Dailey-O’Cain

2000), the researcher focused special attention is given to the use of discourse marker like.

Many sociolinguistic studies have devoted attention to specific uses of the discourse

marker like, particularly among younger generations of Americans (Buchstaller, 2006;

Buchstaller & D'Arcy, 2009; Dailey-O'Cain, 2000). They confirm the widespread belief that this

discourse marker is popular particularly among young people, since its use is concentrated

among populations under the age of thirty or forty (Buchstaller, 2006; Buchstaller & D'Arcy,

2009; Dailey-O'Cain, 2000; Ferrara & Bell, 1995). In addition, it is noted that like does in fact

serve a number of purposes as, “despite its reputation as a filler word for the inarticulate,

efficiently and eloquently fulfills these speaker needs”, including semantic, discourse, and

pragmatic goals (Fuller, 2003, p. 375). The participants in this study developed use of certain

discourse markers that has not been addressed directly by other studies in literature, hence the

need to explore this topic specifically in this review of literature.

For the purpose of this study, two primary forms of like highlighted in research will be

used: focuser like and quotative like (Dailey-O'Cain, 2000; Underhill, 1988). Underhill’s

extensive study highlights that in speech, focuser like precedes new or unusual information, or is
TEENAGERS ABROAD 51

used to highlight the pragmatic importance of what is to come. In natural conversation, it is said

to aim at directing the conversation to focus on what follows the utterance like. In this case, it

can be used preceding many different grammatical structures, including but not limited to noun

phrases, adverb phrases, verb phrases, subordinate clauses or even entire sentences. Some

examples from Underhill’s 1988 study include:

 “You know we’re getting all excited about skiing the first day it’s like snowing…

blizzard snowing” (p. 235)

 “She called collect, and like they talked for an hour.” (p. 238)

 “Like, I don’t know. I told you.” (p. 240)

 “Today I had to ask this girl for a quarter and I mean, like my pride, where is it?” (p. 242)

 “I have more of a like - a Texas pace to my accent.” (p. 245)

In the same study, Underhill (1988) suggests that like can also mean approximately, but

not necessarily. This can be the case in numerical expressions, but this type of use can be

extended to other expressions to soften a request, as in “do you have like any of those change-of-

major forms?” The ambiguity of like to introduce numerical expressions can be used by the

speaker to his or her advantage. One example of the use of ambiguity between focus and

approximation is given of conversation about a volleyball match: “it’s like ten to two.”

Quotative like, also known as “be + like is a flexible discourse resource that can

introduce internal dialogue, gesture, or speech in the first persons as well as third persons”

(Ferrara & Bell, 1995). Some examples from Ferrara and Bell’s 1995 study include:

 “We were like, “Tyrone, are you selling drugs?” “ (p. 266)

 “and the she starts like biting the crap out of me.” (p. 268)

 “it’s like, “blegh” “ (p. 282).

TEENAGERS ABROAD 52

All in all, Dailey-O’Cain’s (2000) study suggests that quotative like is less frequent that

focuser like, and that quotative like is most often used to introduce internal thought.

Approximation like has not generated as much interest, but its use is widely acknowledged

(Underhill, 1988).

Perception of the use of discourse marker like was brought up during data gathering.

Dailey-O’Cain’s 2000 quantitative study of attitudes and perceptions of its use shows that the

majority of respondents generally have an exclusively negative overall perception of discourse

marker like. It is generally associated with poor grammar and lack of education. On the other

hand, the data also revealed that use of like in a younger person made for a more interesting,

engaging, and approachable speaker. The author suggests that this speech trait may be similar to

that of a vernacular, which is often associated with lower social status but also creates solidarity

with the group (Dailey-O'Cain, 2000).

Summary of Literature Review

This review of literature can be summarized briefly as follows:

 High School exchange programs:

o High school exchange programs are regulated at levels ranging from the local

school to the federal levels, and rely heavily on private agency for the selection of

students, schools and families.

o Statistics reveal that over 27,000 international high school exchange students

come to the U.S. each year, primarily from European and Eurasian countries. The

pacific region hosts around 4,000 high school exchange students per year.

 Programmatic Factors in Language Acquisition in Foreign Sojourn:

o The Critical Period Hypothesis is challenged by empirical observations.

TEENAGERS ABROAD 53

o Length and particularly significance of exposure promote language acquisition.

o Instrumental and integrative motivation are thought to have different outcomes for

linguistic improvement; investment is an alternative approach to this concept.

o Learning generally occurs through legitimate participation in communities of

practice, through marginal, peripheral or full participation into COPs.

o Gate-keeping surrounds COPs and prevent access to certain potential members.

o In study abroad, COPs can be made of co-nationals, of host nationals or of other

internationals.

 Language Learning Processes in Foreign Sojourn:

o Task-focused group work may provide space for more opportunities for learning

than provided by typical classroom testing methods.

o Foreign language beginners may see their language skills improve as much as

more advanced learners during foreign sojourn.

o There are clear quantitative and qualitative differences in what is learned in a

classroom and what is learned in an authentic context.

o Learning can be seen as a cognitive, social and cultural process all at once.

o Assessment of the Noticing Theory suggests that, in spite of noticing being

required for learning to occur, noticing may be subtle and more or less

subconscious.

o A comprehensive list of strategies for language learning can be broken down into

direct and indirect strategies, with about ten considered to be essential across

learning situations.
TEENAGERS ABROAD 54

o The theory of WTC covers of broad range of factors, from the actual action of

speaking to social and individual contexts, explaining why an individual may

choose to speak in any given situation.

o Study Abroad can improve WTC, including beyond the period of sojourn.

 Characteristics of Successful Foreign Sojourn:

o Identity is multi-faceted, primarily social and is challenged during foreign

sojourn.

o Acculturation is an affective, behavioral and cognitive process, both at the

individual and societal levels. Literature suggests that immersion and

acculturation support language acquisition.

o Social groups of support are key in the adjustment of sojourner, particularly with

members of the host culture in the medium to long-term.

 Relevant discourse markers:

o Two uses of the discourse markers are highlighted: the more common focuser like

and, the less common quotative like. The use of these discourse markers and the

general perception of its use may to be affected by age and gender, and may be

related to association with a particular group.

The elements of this literature review, from programmatic aspects of a successful study abroad

program to teenagers’ use of discourse markers, will provide the basis for the analysis of data

gathered in the present study, described in detail in the following chapter.

TEENAGERS ABROAD 55

Chapter 3: Methodology

Theoretical Framework

A descriptive study. This study focuses on description. Rossman and Rallis (2012)

characterize descriptive studies as ones that seek to "depict complex social processes and

understandings trough detailed analytic description" and whose "purpose is typically

enlightenment, seeking to display deep insights" (Rossman & Rallis, 2012e). As indicated in the

research question, the purpose of the study is to gain insight into the learning processes of

international high school exchange students. The study is therefore meant to provide depth rather

than breadth of answers to the research question. The results in this study are not meant to be

generalized to a broader population that that surveyed, but rather to represent unique personal

experiences.

Rationale. This research is qualitative. As Rossman and Rallis (2012) suggest,

qualitative research in interested in asking questions about the “real world” (p. 8). They list key

characteristics of qualitative research. First, it takes place in the “natural world” (p. 8) as opposed

to an artificial laboratory setting. The majority of the data in this study is gathered directly at the

location of primary interest, in a rural inland northwest high school where international high

school exchange students enroll for up to two semesters as a study abroad experience. Second,

qualitative research places the focus on individuals and their own interpretation of their lived

experience (Rossman & Rallis, 2012e). Interviewing, the primary data gathering tool, is an

established method to investigate participants’ subjective experiences and to understand their

“perceptions of the world” (Richards, 2003). Through three semi-structured interviews (defined

in the following pages) with each participant, the researcher gathered stories and reflections that

represent the participants’ experiences. Third, it often relies on the use of several research
TEENAGERS ABROAD 56

methods so as to study participants both broadly and deeply, as so as to ensure that the study’s

findings are reliable (Rossman & Rallis, 2012e). For this study, the researcher relies on

individual interviews, field notes taken mostly after these interviews, research into the

individual’s contexts, and reflection as well as input from the researcher’s study group.

Additional data from these participants included journal samples (via e-mail) from each

individual primary participant. In addition, brief surveys to the students’ host parents and to the

high school staff provides basic quantitative data used for triangulation.

As demonstrated in chapter two, there is very little academic research on high school

international exchange programs. Thus, prior to the gathering of field data, research in academia

provided limited information to guide this study; Instead data gathering provided guidance in

determining which studies would be relevant throughout the study, thereby creating a recursive

process between academic research and data gathering. In addition, the researcher wanted to

have the freedom provided by primarily qualitative research, and particularly of interviews, to

allow relevant information to surface. Indeed, qualitative research does not make assumptions

(Rossman & Rallis, 2012e). Rather, it embraces the complexity of experiences and allows for

categories to emerge from the data collection, and it is possible to analyze data with more depth

(Ramsay, Jones, & Barker, 2007). By focusing on depth rather than on breadth, qualitative

research gave the researcher the flexibility needed to paint a picture of individual experiences

and of their impressions of their own lived experiences.

Interviews. Selected current writings on interview procedure guided the interviews with

the participants. As an experienced TESOL researcher, Richards (2003) observed that the first

step in interviewing, once a topic has been selected, is to select participants and a location for
TEENAGERS ABROAD 57

interviewing. As described below, site selection drove participant selection as well as the choice

for interview location, thus meeting Richards’s standards.

In addition, all the interviews in this study are what Richards (2003) calls “formal

interviews,” in the sense that they have been arranged in advance and where all participants

understand the nature of the conversation to take place. These conversations formed an

“interview guide approach” whereby the researcher elicited narratives through pre-established,

open-ended questions and prompted additional details through individualized follow-up

questions (Rossman & Rallis, 2012c). The method can also be compared to semi-structured

interviews, in which the questions serve as guides and can be modified as made necessary

through the interviewing process (Baxter & Babbie, 2003, pp. 329-330; Burns, 2010). The goal

was to generate as much data as possible from participant so as to better characterize their

personal experiences.

Data Collection

Research location. The researcher chose to carry out this study in a small, rural school in

the Pacific Northwest region of the United States. The following data has been provided by the

school and made public in the summer prior to the research, and therefore pertains specifically to

the previous academic year. It is assumed that this data is sufficient for the purposes of this

study.

The local high school serves the local community, and, as of the end of the previous

academic year, counted a little over 500 students. The population was fairly evenly divided

between males and females. Over 90% of students identified as white and there were no migrants

or transitional bilinguals. Finally, less than a quarter of students received free or reduced-price

meals (XYZ School District, 2012c).

TEENAGERS ABROAD 58

In the academic year 2011-2012, achievement in terms of math, reading, writing and

science skills were comparable to those of the state (XYZ School District, 2012c).There were

some thirty teachers, two third of who have obtained Master’s Degrees. Sports offered include

football, wrestling, baseball, girls’ and boys’ basketball and soccer, cheer, track and field, cross

country, girls’ volleyball, tennis and golf (XYZ School District, 2012b). The school’s website

lists ten clubs and activities advised by a school teacher, including the International Club, to

which all exchange students automatically belong (XYZ School District, 2012a).

International exchange students at the local high school represented virtually the only

non-native English speakers and thus received no ESL specific instruction. However, the

international club, its advisor and the school counselor were in regular contact with the students.

Typically, international students take classes of their choice, depending on the requirements of

their specific agency and whether they will transfer credits back to their home institutions. The

level of the courses depends on the individual students’ level in each subject so that they often

take classes in three or four of the four levels offered. The only requirement by the local school

is that students take a U.S. history course. The school only requires that students have passing

grades, but some agencies may have higher standards.

Participant selection. As proposed by Rossman and Rallis (2012b), the selected

participants constitute a convenience sample, which was primarily driven by site selection.

Researchers suggest that the best site to conduct research must be accessible, must provide

participants of interest for the study, should allow for rapport development and should not

impose unreasonable hurdles to the study’s development. The high school was selected as the

site of study following these criteria, and the selection of participants followed.
TEENAGERS ABROAD 59

The primary participants in this study were all international high school exchange

students. International high school exchange students are almost exclusively under the age of 18,

reside with host parents who act as their temporary legal guardians, and attend any given high

school in very limited numbers. In order to obtain participants for this study, the researcher

obtained authorization from participants, their host parents, and the local school. Participants

were also encouraged to check in with their parents in their home countries prior to making this

commitment. Given the number of parties involved, a large scale study was out of the question.

First, personal connections allowed the researcher to select one high school that would

provide all the participants. The researcher provided documentation to describe the study and its

intent to the high school principal and other employees as identified by the principal, in addition

to Gonzaga University through its Institutional Review Board. In agreement with school

officials, it was decided that all nine international high school students would be presented the

opportunity to participate in the study. A school employee who was well connected with the

exchange students, through the advising of the international club, provided the students with an

overview of the study, as well as detailed consent forms both for the students and for their host

parents. Approximately two weeks later, five students had turned in consent forms and thereby

confirmed their interest in the study. These thus constituted a convenience sample derived from

the choice of site (Rossman & Rallis, 2012b).

The secondary participants were, first, the students’ host parents. Students’ participation

required that their host parents support their participation. Upon signing their dedicated consent

forms, host parents agreed to receive an online survey. Three of the four host families started the

survey, but only two responded to all relevant questions.

TEENAGERS ABROAD 60

The second set of secondary participants were the teaching and non-teaching school

employees. They were contacted with a similar online survey by their principal. Eight employees

responded to the survey.

Interviews. The primary tool for data gathering was semi-structured interviews with the

primary participants. Semi-structured interviews are designed as a series of open-ended

questions, coupled with the researcher’s ability to deviate from the pre-established guidelines as

deemed necessary throughout the interview so as to maximize the depth and quality of the

information gathered (Baxter & Babbie, 2003, pp. 329-330).

All students were interviewed three times in the course of their second semester of

program participation, from January through June, 2013. As determined with school officials, all

interviews took place on school grounds after classes and before sports practice and in the

presence of school staff, with two exceptions.

Three participants were interviewed individually, while two requested to be interviewed

together for convenience, given that their schedules were the same and they were housed in the

same home. Each interview lasted 25 to 40 minutes. All interview scheduling was arranged

between the researcher and participants according to their schedule within the framework

described above. The first round of interviews took place between February 8 and February 19.

The second round of interviews took place between February 21 and March 8 and the last round

of interviews on May 22 and 23. Final interview questions can be found in the appendix.

Unfortunately, two of the last interviews took place via Skype because of repeated scheduling

difficulties with participants. Since rapport had already been established with students, and since

Skype allowed for face-to-face interaction, it was thought to be the best alternative.
TEENAGERS ABROAD 61

These interviews were the primary source of data. In order to depict accurately the

participants’ lived experiences, the researcher carried out phenomenological interviews in three

separate steps, as listed by Seidman in Rossman and Rallis (Rossman & Rallis, 2012c). As such,

the first interview consisted in gathering information concerning the participants themselves and

their relevant history and background. The researcher asked questions about the participants’

families and educational backgrounds, about their experience with English prior to their arrival

to the United States, as well as questions to learn about their overall situation and adjustment in

the United States. The second interview asked directed questions aimed at generating stories and

examples of language learning experiences from participants as international high school

exchange students. In other words, the second interview looked to answer the research question

through the personal experiences disclosed by participants. Data analysis of the first and second

set of interviews provided the topics to explore in the third set of interviews. The third interviews

aimed to generate reflection on the part of participants, and allowed the researcher to generate

additional stories of personal experience relating to the more salient themes of the previous

interviews.

Interviews with each participant virtually followed the same order and the same

questions, which were established in advance to ensure that participants’ experiences could be

compared. However, the researcher asked targeted follow-up questions to each individual

participant based on their responses. Questions were intentionally open-ended to allow for

exploration where topics were not imposed by the researcher, but rather emerged from probing

(Rossman & Rallis, 2012c).

Field notes. As suggested by Burns (2010), interview data is not limited to what is

transcribed: instead, it includes observations made by the researcher at the time of the interview.
TEENAGERS ABROAD 62

Notes were not taken during the interview to decrease discomfort in participants and promote

rapport building. Instead, field notes were gathered after each interview, either immediately

while on school grounds or after dropping the students off at their home, in the car.

Journals. In addition to the writing assignment, students responded to two journal

questions via e-mail between their first and second interview, and between their second and third

interview. The writing assignment and the first journal entry were the same for everyone. The

following entry was individualized: each student received a bullet point summary of the data

they provided up until that point, and were asked clarifying questions in their regards. Thus

participants provided short journal entries that were used to generate interview probes and

confirm the researcher’s understanding. Short additional e-mail exchanges are also used as

participant verification and as an additional source of data

English level. Although the study did not allow for continued assessment of the

participants’ English proficiency, it was measured at the end of the first interviews as a

benchmark. The researcher having administered John Tests in the past, this assessment tool was

selected, along with a 15 minute writing assignment. The John Test evaluates participants’

speaking skills, including grammar, fluency, pronunciation and vocabulary. The writing

assignment was assessed by a full-time University English as a Second Language (ESL) faculty.

This evaluation confirmed the students’ ability to participate in the study entirely in English

(although it had already been established by the exchange agencies).

Data Analysis

The data analysis followed Freeman’s process (1998). All interviews were transcribed

and summarized by the researcher shortly after the interviews. The summaries of the second

interviews were e-mailed to participants for participant verification.

TEENAGERS ABROAD 63

Although analysis starts before and during the actual interview, it also continues with

field notes taken during and/or directly following the event (Burns, 2010) and finally following

transcription, which is an essential part of the process both to answer the research question and to

evaluate the quality of the interview (Richards, 2003). All steps outlined here are inspired by

Freeman’s process of data analysis (1998).

Transcription. After transcribing the data gathered in interviews, each interview was

summarized. Raw transcriptions, summaries, data from journals and e-mail exchanges, field

notes, as well as survey results were collected and analyzed. First, data gathered from each

primary participant was analyzed, then all primary participants were compared, and finally, the

information gathered from secondary participants was analyzed in light of findings from the

primary participants. The researcher followed the four steps outlined by Freeman: “naming,

grouping, finding relationships, and displaying” (Freeman, 1998).

Naming. Following Freeman’s (1998, pp. 99-100) naming process, the researcher first

read the transcriptions and other written data, and listened to interview recordings to identify

salient information. Salient information was highlighted in all raw, written data.

Grouping. In order to achieve organize the data as suggested in the data analysis process,

all salient data was transposed onto a digital spreadsheet and grouped into categories so as to

allow flexibility reflecting the researcher’s analysis process. Outliers were also categorized

separately and remained available in case they appeared relevant at a later time. Salient data was

moved to reflect different grouping ideas multiple times, until satisfactory grouping was reached,

forming the themes of the research findings (Freeman, 1998, p. 100).

Finding relationships. Finally, relationships were to be established between the various

categories (Freeman, 1998, p. 100). They were highlighted within and between categories, and
TEENAGERS ABROAD 64

between particular chunks of salient findings. These were placed side to side or connected by

simple arrows representing connections were drawn between groups. Connections were typically

opposition or simultaneousness.

Displaying. The final step, the displaying of data (Freeman, 1998, pp. 100-101) took two

forms. First, the researcher placed all salient information into a spreadsheet highlighting

grouping and relationships. Second, the writing of research findings (chapter 4) serves to display

its findings through description of individual themes.

Research Trustworthiness and Credibility

Role of the researcher. Having had firsthand experience of high school foreign

exchange, the researcher had once an emic perspective on the research question, though ten years

having passed, the researcher can be said to have returned to an etic perspective (Harris, 1976).

As suggested by Richards (2003), a primary concern in this case is to clearly distinguish personal

experience and opinions from those of the participants. Indeed, a researcher not aware of his or

her own bias will not only have a very biased outlook on the data gathered, but will even

influence what data is gathered. Prior to writing interview questions, the researcher brainstormed

opinions and assumptions about language learning in a high school exchange setting so as to be

aware of them. This process was repeated twice during the data gathering phase to maintain a

reasonable level of objectivity. This topic was also discussed regularly in the researcher’s

community of practice, made of one or two other active researchers in the field, plus the thesis

chair.

These steps constituted the researcher’s intentional reflexivity (Rossman & Rallis,

2012d). That being said, complete objectivity does not exist, particularly in the case of

interviews. Interviews being conversations, data is, to an extent, co-created between the
TEENAGERS ABROAD 65

researcher and the participant. Indeed reflexivity involves the researcher and the participants’

mutual influence (Rossman & Rallis, 2012d). Rapport had to be established, and a shared

experience was an undeniable rapport building tool. As much as possible, the researcher used

personal experience only to validate participants’ expressed impressions.

Triangulation. The researcher strengthened the credibility of this research through

triangulation, steps taken to approach data from a variety of angles and “compare, contrast and

cross-check to see whether what [the researcher is] finding through one source is backed up by

other evidence” (Freeman, 1998). Three types of triangulation were used in this study: data

triangulation, methodological triangulation and triangulation in time.

First, triangulation was ensured by the variety of data gathering techniques used by the

researcher. Interviews, field notes take after each interview, e-mail exchanges and journals

contributed to data collection with the five primary participants. Two types of secondary

participants provided outside perspectives on the lived experience of the primary participants.

Salient data gathered from secondary participants was tested for validity during the third round

of interviews with primary participants. Finally, primary participants were interviewed three

times throughout a period of a semester.

Triangulation also requires participant verification. Primary participants showed no

interest in the option to review the full transcripts of interviews. As an alternative, the researcher

submitted summaries of the second interviews to participants via e-mail, and asked them to

correct any mistakes. Participants were pleased with this first verification and all provided

additional insight or clarification in their e-mail responses. In addition, the interviewer submitted

to participants a copy of their sections in chapter 4 and a brief summary of chapter 5 of this study

prior to submission and publication of the final product, and offered to submit the entire
TEENAGERS ABROAD 66

document. It should be noted that only three of the five participants took the opportunity to

respond to the final request for approval. Of those three, two were completely satisfied with how

their perspective was represented, and one request minor modifications to her direct quotes.

The researcher took part in a community of practice (thesis group) discussion regarding

the research and data gathered (Rossman & Rallis, 2012d). This community of practice was

made of fellow researchers in the field of second language acquisition and met every two to four

weeks during the period of data collection and most of the data analysis. Their questions and

insights were crucial in ensuring that the researcher analyzed the raw data thoroughly and

scrupulously. The community of practice was also central to the process that led to the

classifying of raw findings and undeveloped ideas into the concise, and reasoned categories the

researcher eventually displayed.

Ethical Considerations

Institutional Review Board (IRB). Working with a high school population of foreign

students required careful consideration to remain ethical. Creating a proposal for the Institutional

Review Board (IRB) was thus a critical step for this research study. In addition to rationale, the

proposal included thoroughly described the procedures and provided almost all documents to be

used for data gathering. The proposal was written after consultation with the high school, was

submitted to and approved by the IRB and then again submitted to the high school principal and

other designated officials for approval prior to data gathering. The proposal provided detailed

procedures to ensure the participants’ protection was reviewed by the Institution prior to any data

gathering.

Voluntary participation and consent. Special consideration was given to ensuring that

students were voluntary participants and that no coercion took place. This was achieved through
TEENAGERS ABROAD 67

the school designated staff presenting the research project to students before the researcher could

contact those who had agreed to participate. This representative introduced the project clearly to

all nine potential participants, explaining the pros and cons of participating, and making it clear

that the researcher would only contact them if they agreed to participate. In addition, it was made

clear to them that their participation or lack thereof would not affect their overall program

participation. School employees were contacted by the school principal himself, while host

parents agreed to receive an e-mail survey in the consent form dedicated to them.

It was first suggested that primary participants receive a copy of the consent form in their

native language so that they could share it with their parents in their home countries for approval.

However, the IRB and the high school suggested that given the students’ status, this was not

necessary. They were, however, given the opportunity to contact the researcher and the

researcher’s faculty advisor for any questions they might have. Host parents received their own

consent form outlining the process for their students as well as for themselves (cf. appendix).

The time and location of the interview was considered carefully. Students were interview

after class and before team sports practice since many of them were involved in school sports. A

classroom was available to that effect, and a school employee was present in the room or the next

one with the door open at all times. Host parents, however, had to agree to let the researcher

drive their students home after the interviews. The researcher made sure to meet the host parents

who were available after taking the students home.

Students were also given the right to withdraw from the study at any time. They were

encouraged to ask questions and to request changes or make modifications to their statements as

they saw fit, with or without the researcher’s prompting. This was stated in the consent form and
TEENAGERS ABROAD 68

confirmed orally during interviews. The IRB proposal and the consent forms outlined how

participants’ information would remain confidential.

Finally, Burns (2010) emphasizes the importance of communicating the purpose of the

interview with participants so as to avoid misunderstandings (2010). The researcher outlined the

study’s goals in the consent form and orally prior to the first interview, setting time aside for

questions and conversations about the research project and its outcomes. Finally, as part of

building rapport and of maintaining high ethical standards, the researcher encouraged questions

regarding any topic of interest to participants, including personal experience as an exchange

student.

Confidentiality. All data was collected and saved securely in the researcher’s locked

office and private computer. The researcher was the only person with access to raw data.

The primary participants were all asked to choose a pseudonym by which they would be referred

in the study, thereby protecting their identity. In addition, the participants’ home countries are

not disclosed. General descriptions are only be used to the extent deemed relevant to the analysis

of their experiences. Similarly, the exact location of the exchange program is not be disclosed.

The secondary participants, school employees and host parents, were not identifiable

directly by the survey, which was carried out by means of a secure online platform. The

researcher made no efforts to identify respondents so as to maintain their anonymity.

Summary of the Methodology

The methodology can be broken down into the following three parts.

 Securing of IRB and local high school support, followed by identification of participants.

 Data collection from January to May 2013, consisting of:

TEENAGERS ABROAD 69

o Five p`rimary participants who were all high school foreign exchange students for

one academic year beginning in September 2012. Data gathered from these

participants consisted in:

 An English proficiency test at the onset of the study;

 Three thirty to forty five minute interviews;

 E-mail journals and other exchanges between and after interviews;

 Field notes taken by the researcher.

o Secondary participants, who were the teachers and school staff at the local high

school and host parents of the participants. They contributed responses to

anonymous online surveys (one for school staff and a separate one for parents).

 Transcription and data analysis.

The following two chapters are the result of the last step, the transcription and analysis of

data. C provides a summary of findings, starting with some background information on the

primary participants’ home countries, particularly in terms of English education, followed by a

summary of each primary participant’s experience. Finally, the data collected from secondary

participants’ will be presented briefly.

TEENAGERS ABROAD 70

Chapter 4: Summary of Findings

After a brief overview of English in the participants’ home countries, this chapter

provides a summary of the data gathered for each participant in the study, as verified with the

participants, per chapter 3. There were five primary participants who responded to journal

questions three times and were interviewed three times each, following a semi-structured model.

Although they followed the same format and general questions, conversations with each

participant led the researcher to finding unique information from each participant. All questions

and information summarized below is deemed relevant to answer the main research questions:

 How do international high school students perceive their own language

acquisition?

 What do they think helps or hinders their learning in terms of community,

program structure, personality and other factors?

English in the Participants’ Countries

For each participant’s experience, a brief introduction with include information about

English in their individual home country so as to provide useful background information.

The majority of international high school exchange students studying in the United States

are from the Eurasian and European regions, followed by the East Asia and Pacific region.

German students represent almost a quarter of the entire population, with the next largest

segment being Chinese students, who represents about 8% (Council on Standards for

International Educational Travel, c; Poehlman, 2012). The graph in the section on U.S.

demographics (found in chapter 2) illustrates the regions of origin of high school exchange

students to the United States in 2011-2012.

TEENAGERS ABROAD 71

Education First (EF), a leader in international travel and international education services,

created and published, starting in 2011, the yearly English Proficiency Index (called EF EPI) of

countries around the world. This index measures the proficiency of adults through two online

tests and one test taken by students around the world prior to enrolling in English courses. Tests

were developed by the University of Cambridge ESOL (English for Speakers of Other

Languages). Strengths of this program are the low pressure for test takers, the number of test

takers, as well as the collaboration between EF and Cambridge. A weakness, however, is that test

takers are self-selected and thus may not be entirely representative of the overall population.

Tests include assessment of grammar knowledge, vocabulary, reading and listening (EF

Education First Ltd, 2012).

According to these measures, European countries are generally proficient in English.

Europe is the region of the world outside of English speaking countries with the highest level of

overall proficiency. However, there is a wide proficiency gap within the region, in particular

between the proficiency in countries such as Sweden, Denmark or the Netherlands, where

proficiency is very high, versus Italy, Spain or France, where proficiency is deemed moderate.

The report further suggests that these European countries place an emphasis on English

education so as to remedy their less-than-satisfactory performance (EF Education First Ltd.,

2012a). The European Union has made communication in foreign languages one of its key

competences for lifelong learning (European Commission, Directorate-General for Education

and Culture, 2007)

In addition to these measures, the European Union, through Eurostat, has published data

comparing individual European countries’ educational systems (Eurydice & Eurostat, 2012).

These two sources provide the information on students’ individual countries’ education system
TEENAGERS ABROAD 72

as it relates to these individual students’ English. Notes will also be made regarding these

countries’ attitudes towards the English language. Note that the information gathered is not fully

balanced as information about countries is not always readily available.

Individual Students’ Experiences

In the following section, the researcher attempted to relay the students’ experiences as

closely as possible to the way they conveyed them. For this reason, many unaltered quotes are

used. These direct quotes selected from interviews and journal entries by the participants are

differentiated from the researcher’s voice by italics and indentation. Most of the citations come

from oral interviews, whereas a few are excerpts from written documents, in which case this is

indicated before the quote. Interview and journal questions can be found in the appendix. The

format and organization of the data was derived from the interviews, primarily relying on

chronological order or experiences. More general, overarching elements are reviewed towards

the end of each student’s section. Therefore, data gathered from each student will follow this

order:

 Brief overview of English education in their home country

 Life in their home country

 Deciding the study abroad

 The student’s English proficiency

o In the beginning…

o Throughout the program…

 Contexts for learning English

o Host family

o Peers
TEENAGERS ABROAD 73

o Classroom

 Personality & risk taking

A brief summary of each participant’s overall experience and personality will close each section.

Jefferson: I didn't notice a difference until you asked me

Jefferson is a likeable young man, who will be completing his high school diploma in the

United States before pursuing a college degree. He is very intelligent, humble, self-aware and

motivated by his passions. Jefferson also likes to joke around.

English in Jefferson’s home country. Jefferson’s country was given a high proficiency

score by the EF EPI, with an upward trend in the last few years (Education First, 2013; EF

Education First Ltd., 2012b; Eurydice & Eurostat, 2012).

Life in Jefferson’s home country. Jefferson grew up in a large city with his parents and

a younger sister. Although his younger sister is very different from him, he gets along with her

quite well, as he does with his parents. He has phone or video conversations with them weekly.

Jefferson has been going to the same school since first grade. In the fifth and sixth grades,

he met his three closest friends. They are the ones he spends most of his time with. They like

going to movies, to dinner or out for drinks together, and they enjoy the same books and music.

Jefferson claims that he is the gamer of the group so he tends to play his favorite video games on

his own. Jefferson enjoys how comfortable it is to walk around and just relax in his hometown.

Jefferson's school offered English classes from the first grade, which is unusual in his

country. However, he expresses frustration with English education that remained so basic,

starting around fifth grade or so.

I actually started learning from my elementary school I learned English only from
school and what not, but then came fifth grade and school practically did nothing
to me about English.
TEENAGERS ABROAD 74

I actually learned English from video games and books and from going to online
and stuff.

Jefferson was interested in video games, and in order to play them online, he needed to

learn more than what was provided in school. He started watching movies in English with

subtitles in his native language when he was able to read them fast enough and had solid

foundations in English to follow along, and he practiced these language skills while playing

online. He also grew frustrated with translated books:

If it's translated from like English or (...) whatever, the translations usually really
suck, really really bad, like half the jokes and stuff don’t even make sense.

For this reason, he started reading books in both English and his native language. One of

his English teachers, from seventh to ninth grades, however, did leave a good impression on him.

He explains:

She used to make us like present dialogues to the class and it was usually fun
(...). That actually helped me speaking normally with people, but yeah, other than
that, school didn't do much to me.

Finally, Jefferson believes that he has a natural knack for languages. In a journal,

he writes:

I usually catch on to learning new languages fairly easily.

Deciding to study abroad. Jefferson explains that he and his parents had talked about

him studying in the United States or the United Kingdom for a long time before he actually made

that decision. One of his very close friends also studied in the United States as an exchange

student the year prior. He remembers the process being long and cumbersome more than

anything else.
TEENAGERS ABROAD 75

Jefferson’s English proficiency.

In the beginning… Jefferson believes that he was highly motivated by his interest in video

games and books, without which his English would not have been as high as it was to begin with.

He explains that speaking was not his strongest skill upon arrival, but that might be due to his

introverted personality at least as much as with his English proficiency. When he talks about

speaking in class in his home country, in different conversations, he explains:

There’s some speaking practice I actually have... From seventh grade to ninth
grade I had this awesome teacher, she used to make us like present dialogues to
the class and if it was usually fun.
I usually don't like speaking in public, I get goose bumps.
I’m kind of an introvert.

Consequently, he rates his different skills at the onset of the experience as follows:

Reading and writing are my best. Listening, most of the time.

I think it's (and was) easier for me to write and listen than to speak.
Speaking, I kinda like ran over myself sometimes and there’s there are sentences
that I try to speak and it all comes nothing and I'm like, let me rewind that
speaking!

Based on the benchmark test done in January, Jefferson’s overall English proficiency at the onset

of the study was very high in all skills. Accuracy and fluency were some of his strongest skills,

but his pronunciation was also excellent.

Throughout the program… In his first journal, he writes:

So far, my English is practically unchanged, except maybe my accent is more

American than British now.

In the next interview, he adds:

Yea (it’s) progressive, I didn't notice a difference until, until you asked me.
TEENAGERS ABROAD 76

There’s something different, well, now that you mention it, yea, kinda.
I mean, one gets used to it and I don't even know.
There wasn’t this click, and like, oh I'm speaking!

Later on, he notes that he has progressively improved. Throughout his stay:

My listening and speaking have been increased a lot. My writing has stayed the
same.

All in all, Jefferson feels he is close to having achieved what he had planned in terms of

English. However, this is only one step towards his long-term goal to move to the United States

for work after he graduates from college.

Contexts for Learning English.

Host Family. Jefferson feels very lucky to have been placed in this host family:

So my host family I have two siblings, a mom and dad. My host sister, she’s a
senior here so and my host brother he's a freshman here. They’re cool.
My host mom's awesome she like cooks the most amazing things, like she
randomly does like chocolate chip cookies.
And my, my host dad he's like he's a prankster, he's a joker. He’s always messing
with me and my host eh brother. It’s like how my host brother says, like 95% of
what he says is a lie and the other 5% is not true.
They're like my second family.

He feels most comfortable with them, and therefore they are the ones he asks the most questions

to:

What do you call this, or how do you say this, or what's the name of that place or
person (...). I ask them stuff that I'm like unsure of how to say, yea, and they
answer.

Nevertheless, it is difficult for Jefferson to identify specific examples of what he has learned with

his host family. In a journal, he explains:

TEENAGERS ABROAD 77

It’s usually nothing terribly important and once I have learned it, I immediately
forget I had to ask in the first place. So, although I have the knowledge that I
asked people about stuff like that, I really do not remember exactly what.

Peers. Jefferson is a self-proclaimed introvert, who does not spend much time surrounded

by people outside of class.

Out of class I usually go by myself. (…) I’m kind of an introvert, I don’t hang out
with a lot of people.
I usually have lunch in the library. (…) I like eating quietly.

Coming to a new school gave him the opportunity to start fresh and make new friends:

Frankly I think people are nicer in general and let's just say that I wasn’t the most
popular guy in like in [home country] there are bunch of people that didn't like
me and I didn't like.
But here there's barely anyone who I really don't like, so I mean everyone's nice
to me and I'm nice to everyone.

Jefferson has a few good American friends. He mostly met them in class.

And I have like some friends in other classes and what not but my main group of
friends is like the calculus geeks.
We play video games. I have like this friend of mine, I went to his house and his
mom, we, we set ourselves near the computer, I got my laptop and we started
playing and like we stayed there for like five hours (...). It's a fun way of wasting
time.

Aside from the expressions he believes he has translated directly from his native

language, Jefferson explains:

I think that since you kinda hear like subconsciously, people say that a lot, (I use
kinda a lot, by the way) kinda incorporate into your own speech without even
noticing it. I say I mean a lot, too.

In other words, he has picked up expressions and linguistic habits from peers.
TEENAGERS ABROAD 78

In general, he also agrees that an extroverted personality helps international

students improve their English.

I guess if you are extroverted, people are more friendly. You are not that weird
exchange student who doesn't talk to everyone and everyone shuns. You're the
exchange student that everyone wants to hang out with.

Earlier, he explains:

If I was really closed off, I wouldn't, I wouldn't have practiced my English as

much.

When asked about vocabulary, Jefferson states that:

It increased, like some expressions that I knew existed and now I can't think
of an example but it happened more than once when I say something, people
look at me strange, like what? You guys don't say that? Oh.

Classroom. Jefferson, despite one of his goals to maintain B+ grades for the duration of

his stay and pressure from his parents to study more than he feels he really needs to, finds that

classes are much easier in content than what he was used to. He explains that what he learned in

AP calculus, AP biology and others, he studied between the 7th and 9th grade. The content being

easy for him, and he did not feel he had to push himself to study:

The chemistry that I am learning now I learned in 7th grade so…

The class with senior and juniors and sophomores, and I learned in 7th grade.
And I mean eh I think, eh biology, AP biology was with sophomores and juniors
and most of it I already had done.
I didn’t think I had to study that much. (…). I thought that most of my classes
were easy so I didn’t feel that pressure to sit down for three or four hours like my
colleagues (classmates) did.
Since the content itself was easy, my English started going smoother because we
actually knew what we were talking about. I, I could say more and so I used my
English more I guess and you learn you learn the language and stuff.
TEENAGERS ABROAD 79

He did find that his civics class was the most challenging one because the content was at least in

part unknown to him prior to his arrival.

Jefferson notices a clear difference between the way he addresses his peers and the way

he addresses teachers.

Since like classroom is kind of a more, kind of a more formal a environment and
yea you're supposed to have more careful, eh, way of speech. It's like you, you,
you try to speak better with your teachers, kind of, at least I try.

He adds:

Maybe I’m corrected (…) so eventually you get to learn more.

As he explained with what he learned from his host family, Jefferson forgets that he has learned

something very quickly after having to ask for help.

He also notices that teachers model a certain way of speaking:

My biology teacher, he's like older, not older like really old but he's probably like
eh, upper forties, and so he doesn't speak eh with like the same mannerisms that
we do. (…) He doesn't say stuff like, you know, and he doesn't do, like, that kind of
slang. For example, like younger teachers like Murray, he gets more, he talks
always like, like we do, but still with some tone of seriousness. It's kind of like a
mix between us and the older generation of teachers so.

Jefferson has encountered a class environment where he acts quite differently than he would

have back home:

At home I was really shy, and I wasn't really comfortable speaking in class, and
teachers usually had to ask me to speak up (...). But now since, like, everyone
kinda accepts me, like in school, and there's not nearly as much pressure and so
I'm more willing to take risks.

He notices a difference in the way teachers act around students and vice-versa, which

explains his changed behavior:

TEENAGERS ABROAD 80

Even the teachers here are so much nicer like in [home country] it's like complete
dictatorship. It's like you sit down you should have done your work and... Here’s
like we have more liberty, we like the teachers are more our friends than yea.. I
mean they’re teacher but you can still mess up with them I mean you saw me and
Murray. That would never happen in [home country].
In class itself, I kinda like try to open myself 'cause I didn't really have experience
going to like class, a friendly class and stuff.

He goes on to explain that he recuperates energy by spending most of his breaks and

lunches alone, but during class, he is much more social than he ever was used to being.

Sometimes I just want to be alone because it's kinda like I have this limit to how
much I can eh, handle. And so I mean there's class, and then out of class, (…)
unless, like I find a group of people in front of the door to the class I just stay by
my lonesome self.

Jefferson also somewhat wishes he had taken an English class instead of life sports.

Because of his personal interests, he would have enjoyed such a class.

If I had a choice I would go back and (take English) because I'd like to take some
classic English literature. It would be fun I guess.

Nevertheless, he is satisfied with his ability to sustain a conversation in English:

With practically anyone else so I don't really need more English I guess.

Personality & risk taking. Jefferson admits that he has had to step outside of his comfort zone at

times, but it was not something he was necessarily very conscious of. The circumstances around

him changed, so he behaved slightly differently accordingly. He never felt he was untrue to

himself. Back home, he would never have raised his hand in class unless he was completely sure

he knew the answer to the question being asked. But here:

I just blurt everything out and make fun of… But it's all good! Cause like
especially in calculus. In calculus it’s like me and my friends trading blows all the
time and (…) it’s all good fun.
TEENAGERS ABROAD 81

In other words, he takes risks in English when he simply socializes with friends. He

explains that, on the other hand, back home

I mean there would not have been as many risks to take because the English
wasn’t that developed like in class and stuff and, in my schoolmates, but normally
I would (answer) a question if I really knew the answer.

He primarily attributes his risk-taking to the change in environment.

Summary. Jefferson appears to have been quite confident in his English ability from the

beginning of his program. However, his efforts to adapt to the new population around him and to

their attitudes stands out, although he maintained strong self-awareness. He found cultural and

linguistic informants in his host parents and in some of his teachers.

TEENAGERS ABROAD 82

Irene: You learn it or die

English education in Irene’s country. Irene’s home country ranks moderate on the EF

EPI, with an upwards trend in recent years. Although the educational system emphasizes English

education from a young age for all, this country’s residents self-report low proficiency. In fact,

the language is rarely pursued outside of required primary and secondary education, and also

faces competition from regional languages. In addition, English skills are not emphasized in the

work force (Education First, 2013; EF Education First Ltd., 2012b; Eurydice & Eurostat, 2012).

Mia’s, Jefferson’s and Irene’s countries have similar requirements in terms of hours of

foreign language instruction in secondary education (Eurydice & Eurostat, 2012).

Note that Irene asked to have some modifications made to the excerpts from her

interviews. She felt her voice would better be heard with minor modifications, primarily

removing certain discourse markers.

Life in Irene’s Home Country. Irene grew up in a small town with her two younger siblings

and parents. Although she did not talk about them much, Irene explains that she cares about and

respects her family tremendously, and misses them while she is abroad. Besides her family, she

says that she misses the food, the weather and her friends the most.

I really like the, now that I’ve been here, the weather in [home country], the
summer I really like the summer. The way you can be in the beach all the time and
and then I really like the food. We have really good food. And my family and my
friends, obviously. And I've been in the same school my whole life so I guess I like
my school too.

Attending the same school her whole life has allowed her to build and strengthen

relationships from a very young age, and she has known many of her friends since elementary

school, including her best friend.

TEENAGERS ABROAD 83

I have like friends that I have been friends with them since like first grade and we
are still best friends.

She and her friends are together as often as possible and they like to support each other's sporting

events, go out in the evening or go to the movies.

At school, Irene remembers studying English from third grade on as a regular class, and

from first grade on as an additional, after class program.

I think in third grade I'm sure it start being a subject that you have to take, but in
1st grade and 2nd grade we had to stay after school and take this class. I don’t
remember what we used to do, it was just like the numbers and...

English class was primarily writing-based, with an emphasis on grammar. In addition to classes,

Irene and her friends have been going to an after-school program led by a native English speaker

to practice speaking. She feels she has learned both speaking and vocabulary from this

experience. She enjoyed participating in a program that was both exciting and instructive.

Almost everyone, when they're (at) the end (of) high school they can speak, have a
conversation, hi how are you. But apart from the school stuff (…) I used to go to
a ... so there was this class I used to do a class of just speaking.
(The teacher) was really young, I really like her.
So it was just an extra activity where we went and talked. (…) We did learn
vocab.

Deciding to study abroad. Irene had the idea of becoming an exchange student when

one of her friends returned from studying in the United States. Hearing about her experience

made Irene want to have her own:

Oh yea so there’s this girl that is two or three years older than me, she did it
when she was my age. (…) She came back in June and l I hanged out with her
during the summer. She was always telling what she did and like, I wanna do
that!
TEENAGERS ABROAD 84

She asked for her parents' support right away. Her father, who has traveled to the United States,

was very supportive, followed by her mother. After researching agencies, the family made their

choice and Irene went in for her English test, then completed her profile, and waited many

months for placement.

Irene’s English proficiency.

In the beginning…Irene’s overall English proficiency at the onset of the study was very

high in all skills. Fluency and vocabulary were some of her strongest skills.

Irene often relies on others' perception and judgment to evaluate her English proficiency.

She was fairly confident in her ability early on: she had been warned that most students who take

the pre-departure English test have to take it again, but she did not. Upon arrival, others

complimented her on her proficiency. She often repeats, I never thought about it when asked

about how she improved her linguistic ability. However, she notices:

I had a good English before, not even close to what I can do now.
I could talk and kinda understand.
When I first came here, I thought it was easier to listen than to talk.

Nevertheless, despite her relative comfort:

I've been doing English my whole life and I could understand people and they
would talk. At the beginning it was easier to hear people talking than talking.(…)
At the beginning I feel that I was just listening and (trying) to understand how
(English) works.

Thus understanding never caused her insurmountable difficulties, while speaking was the most

difficult task.

Sometimes it was easy, in class it was easy to write (because I could) look at it in
the dictionary and take my time. Instead if I had to do an oral presentation for
example it was harder than an essay or something.
TEENAGERS ABROAD 85

Throughout the program… For the most part, Irene finds it difficult to talk about her

language improvement:

I never thought about it.

You learn a lot without thinking about it. (…) When I was here for two months, I
was Skyping with my parents, and my parents heard me speaking English and
they were like: you've improved a lot! I didn't really feel it that I improved that
much.
You don't realize day by day improvement.

Irene often talks about being creative and finding alternate ways to fill language gaps or to

engage her interlocutors to maintain conversation. She explains:

For example if you don't know how to say ball, you could say that thing that
they're playing basketball with or something like that. I guess you have to learn
how to express yourself, learn how to, when you dunno how to say something, you
gotta learn a different way to say it, or the right way.

In addition, Irene is not a shy person and likes to ask for help whenever she does not

understand.

In terms of skills, Irene explains:

Listening is the most improved one I think cause getting used to the accent and I
mean they say that they don’t have an accent but they, they have an American
accent. But... I've guess I've learned grammar but I don't really feel it.

She adds:

I've gained a lot but I think at vocabulary is the most.

I think what I've learned most is vocabulary. Because I think the construction I
knew it already, like the way to construct sentences.
TEENAGERS ABROAD 86

Writing was a skill Irene had developed in her home country. In fact, she explains:

When I start writing, I feel that I'm still using what I learned (at home), when I
write conditionals.

Learning English.

Host family. In the United States, Irene lives with her two host parents, two young

children, and sometimes two other children as her host family is a recomposed one.

They are both divorced and remarried together and they have the… Matthew, this
my host dad, he has a thirteen years old guy and a ten years old ten or 11 years
old guy too, Christopher and Steven. They, just come every other weekend cause
they always live with their mom. So then the third one is called Steven too. He’s
from the mom and he's 8 and he's almost always living with us but every other
weekend he goes with his dad or his grandma. And then there's the last one that is
four years old, she's the cutest girl. Her name is Sophie and she's from both.

Before she arrived, she knew that they would offer a safe haven with adults who were excited to

have her join their family, and who would understand that she might need more time because her

language would not be perfect. She has been comfortable with her host family from day one.

At the beginning I used to do everything with them but now when they go to have
dinner I'm always with them. A lot of times on Sundays, they a lot of times are
home a lot of times. (If) I hang out with someone I always let them know, it's not
like I'm independent or anything.

Thinking back to instructions given by the program prior to her departure, she adds:

They tell you not to be in your room like, I'm never like that, I always try to talk to
them. For example, I never play video games and here I started playing video
games with them. It's fun, actually!

Irene remembers a specific instance where she was sick and asked her host mother for

vocabulary to talk about her symptoms. She writes:

TEENAGERS ABROAD 87

It’s pretty funny how you learn vocabulary when you need it. This last week I had
my first cold here in USA, and I had no idea how to say: stuffy nose, to blow my
nose, or throat (to say my throat hurts or I need a Kleenex to blow my nose).

She recalls that what she has learned in her first weeks, including with her host family, she

remembered almost instantly. After asking for vocabulary or a definition:

People told me once and then I remembered it (...) 'cause I gotta remember that
'cause I'm gonna need it.
Your first months here you learn a lot, you memorize a lot.
You memorize a lot and you don't do it intentionally but it just happens. It has to
happen.

Having young host siblings, she has learned specific vocabulary that is relevant to children's

behavior and discipline.

Sometimes you don't have to ask. I mean when I heard them say, you're being
naughty, I didn’t even know what that meant. But then for form listening to tell
her you're being rude or don't be rude, you end up learning those type of vocab
words.

Peers.

At the middle of the year, I realized that I had more problems understanding at
lunch what we are talking about with American people than here, listening to the
teacher. (...) In a conversation, if they say something and you don't understand it's
really hard.

Although listening was fairly easy for Irene, she experienced the most difficulty in informal

settings with domestic peers.

For example I remember the first day of school that someone said like what's up?
And I didn't even know what that meant and I was like, I dunno what that mean.

She adds that she was most concerned about her relationship with peers even prior to her arrival.
TEENAGERS ABROAD 88

I always felt that the family wasn’t gonna be hard cause they were want to do this,
they want you, right? (…) I was more afraid of the high school ‘cause (…) maybe,
they don't like you 'cause you're from (home country).

In other words, she was nervous that teenagers would not have the patience and the empathy she

expected from adults such as her host parents. She also suggests that, although she asked

questions indiscriminately when she did not understand, she is more likely to ask a second time

to a teacher or a host parent than a friend:

Sometimes someone will say my knee hurts, and you don't know what knee means,
and you're gonna ask and you're gonna learn it.
Maybe I have more confidence to ask twice to my host parents or a teacher than a
friend.

Because she was surrounded by friends in her home country and because she was most

nervous about making friends, Irene joined the cross country team a day before class started.

I started cross country so I got to know people (...) so the first day I had someone
to sit at lunch.

Irene has been involved in new sports for each season so as to stay active and so as to meet

people. She mentions:

I started dating a guy, (...) I guess that was good to meet people and hang out
after school.

Dating gave her an opportunity into another peer group, and those friendships lasted. She adds

that attitude and personality have a lot to do with social success as well:

I mean maybe you have a really good English but if you have friends or are super
nice and super funny and you keep talking to everyone, then it's way easier to
improve your English than if you are a really shy person and you're insecure.
TEENAGERS ABROAD 89

She equates this outgoing attitude and involvement in different activities to confidence and

summarizes,

having confidence,(when) being an exchange student is good not only for the
language, it's good for everything.
You just gotta be confident.

Despite these efforts and despite her connections with peer groups, Irene feels the first

semester was difficult because she missed her group of friends back home.

When you've been here 3 weeks you start feeling, I miss my real friends, cause
here (…) it's not that they don’t talk to you but they're not as close as your friends
in (home country). But when we started the second semester, I started to feel
better.

Of participating in sports and in a youth group, Irene claims:

There’s no way to learn what I've learned in class.
For example, who's gonna teach you how to say “keep it up”? That is what they
say in basketball when you need to keep going, and I dunno, expressions and
vocabulary and it's just in the life every day. If you don't experience it, there's no
way to learn it.

She also learned swearing and setting-specific language with peers she did not hear from

her host parents. She compares learning a language to learning a sport:

Compare it to basketball for example. When you're in class back in your home
country, it's not even practice; it's like reading about the sport.

On the other hand, learning English:

It’s like a sport, the more you do it, the better you get.

She also explains that her confidence grew throughout her stay. At first:

I didn't have too bad English but I was too afraid, I thought too much about
construction and that kind of stuff.
TEENAGERS ABROAD 90

Later she adds:

I was scared and that has changed ‘cause now I have a lot more confidence.

In fact, soon enough she stopped thinking about it because she favored communicating

with people despite mistakes. She explains that even without paying attention:

You really learn without thinking about it.

She remembers:

Actually the other day I was (...) reading the first conversation with Julie and Mia
and, oh my God, my English was so bad.

Outside of such opportunities to reflect on her proficiency, Irene cannot identify her

progress. She also remembers worrying that friends would not understand if she sent them a text

message with your instead of you're, for example. She quickly learned that this would not hinder

understanding:

But you have to write it right, I mean I still try to write it right, it's stupid to lose it
if you have it already.

She also notices that what she learns with peers is different from what she may learn with other

groups of native speakers:

When I'm with people of my age, I'm gonna learn for example how to swear, with
my host family I'm not gonna swear. You can say it's bad but at the same time it's
learning. And yea you just learn different things.

Classroom. Irene had a very diverse schedule, with classes in freshmen to pre-college

levels.
TEENAGERS ABROAD 91

I never had problems understanding the teacher (...). It was hard with the host
family and with friends but in class it wasn't hard at all.
At the middle of the year I realized that I had more problems understanding at
lunch what we are talking about with American people than like here listening to
the teacher.

She attributes this to the accessibility of the content, which was generally below what she was

used to in her home country. She also explains:

For example math, was like the level was way easier. I mean I guess it's because
was in a freshman class first so it was really easy and now I'm in a senior class,
it's called like pre-col, math pre-college.

For example if we have a project to do in (home country), it has to be this day and
were probably not gonna have time to work on it in class and instead here they
get a lot of chances to turn assignments back in and they get a lot of time in class
and a lot of help.

If a teacher uses a word or phrase she does not understand, they generally spend enough

time on the topic for her to gather the context she needs to understand its meaning sooner or later

in the lesson. In addition, she believes strongly in asking questions, particularly in class. When

asked whether she asked questions in class, she responded:

Sure at the beginning, I do it or in class when he's writing something on the board
and I don’t understand the board. I usually don't do it now cause I can
understand it but at the beginning.
Everyone knows that you're not gonna understand everything.(...) If there's
something new and you don't understand it, you gotta let them know that you
don't understand it. (...) Because, there's people I guess that, they stay quiet and
they just don't know what we have to do.

Irene does not understand other people being shy, and she feels strongly that being confident

makes the life of an exchange student easier.

TEENAGERS ABROAD 92

If you don't (ask questions any time you don’t understand), you'll end up learning
English but this way is easier because in a month you'll be more confident. 'Cause
otherwise it's gonna be harder and you're gonna sink back.

However, Irene believes that, in the United States, she shifted her focus from getting

good grades to improving her English:

Here I don't worry at all about grades ‘cause you just do your assignment and you
study for your test and you have an A. So yes, I think this way is better because
this way you can focus on English and you don't get frustrated and have too much
things to do.

Personality & risk taking. As mentioned earlier, Irene stands out for her outgoing and

adventurous personality. She loves being surrounded by peers but counts on adults for stability.

She does not talk about changing much throughout her experience, except for increased

confidence tied to overcoming her fear to make mistakes. In general, she believes fear of

being misunderstood prevented her from speaking. This feeling passed after a few weeks.

You get that confidence you realize people can understand me so I'll be fine.
I did care way more (about accuracy) at first ‘cause I was scared of doing
something, (a) really big mistake.

She comes to accept her mistakes and imperfect pronunciation and focuses on overcoming gaps

through creativity and by engaging her interlocutors.

It’s like playing a sport, the more you do it the better you get.

Occasionally, she falls back on a bilingual dictionary downloaded onto her cell phone.

When talking about risk-taking, one situation stands out. Irene still finds talking to

complete strangers challenging, although quite a bit less so than early on during her stay.

She recalls ordering a sandwich at Subway:

TEENAGERS ABROAD 93

I used to be really scared of talking to them because I knew they wouldn't

understand me. (...) That has changed 'cause now I have a lot more confidence.

She explains at a later point that, knowing that strangers who may not anticipate her

being foreign were most difficult, because they might not be prepared to give her the time

she needs.

Finally, she believes that the conjunction of listening and speaking practice allow

for improvement:

It’s (listening and speaking) together. If you hear let's say door, the first time
you're gonna say door, and then you're gonna get used to say door.

Summary. Irene is most likely the most outgoing of the participants, and also the

youngest. She is uncomplicated and very comfortable in the environment, and she understands

that people will like her for who she is without feeling the need to change or hide. She believes

that her personality, at least as much as her relatively high English proficiency contributed to her

level of comfort.

Tanja: you can laugh with them

Tanja is a very optimistic, joyful, intelligent and active young woman. She is very

attached to those in her life, while being independent. She has high expectations for herself in

many ways, but her sense of humor and drive help her face adversity.

English education in Tanja’s country. Tanja’s country’s overall English proficiency is

rated high by the EF EPI (EF Education First Ltd., 2012b). Her country regards English as a

necessary tool to develop for career development as well as for travel, alongside other foreign

languages. Most, though not all regions, require that all students receive English education. The

emphasis on communicative language teaching is increasing, and the vast majority of children
TEENAGERS ABROAD 94

start earning English in middle school (EF Education First Ltd., 2012b). Tanja’s country requires

the largest number of foreign language instruction hours in secondary education when compared

to the other four countries at hand (Eurydice & Eurostat, 2012).

Life in Tanja’s home country. Tanja’s English proficiency at the beginning of the study

was very high. She displayed a high fluency and an excellent command of syntax.

Tanja grew up in a fairly large European city. What she misses the most about it are the

public transportation, which makes her feel independent, and the scenery and architecture, which

she finds mesmerizing.

Yes, it’s a beautiful city. And I like the public transportation because, because you
can just go everywhere. Here you're just always, like, can you give me a ride and
I feel so bad and... and it's really pretty. (…) It's really old, and we have this river
flowing through it.

Tanja found school in her home country to be quite stressful and difficult. Her teachers

were not generally very approachable. Nevertheless, she achieved high scores, including in

English where she was at the top of her class. She believes her English education really began in

the fifth grade, with only about an hour and a half or two of weekly lesson. The focus was placed

on written skills, which are within Tanja’s stated comfort zone.

I was 10th grade (…) and then I go back and then I'm 11th grade. I have to
repeat, I mean the year.
It’s more stressful.
(In home country’s English class) we just always wrote essays and I don't have
problems with essays.

Tanja is very active and likes to stay busy with friends, sports, and music. Back home,

I had everything like every afternoon I had another activity so I was just really
busy. I played the flute and the piano and I was in a youth group and I played
handball.
TEENAGERS ABROAD 95

Tanja also has good friends whom she misses. She talks to her best girlfriend regularly,

and to a few other very close friends. She finds these relationships inspire her to achieve more.

She considers herself reserved but her best friend is quite outgoing, which works out nicely for

her in general.

I have a best friend, (…) she’s super smart. (…) She’s the one that you hang out
with the most, (…) almost every weekend we do something together.
It’s like her, the main friend, and then I have like a best guy friend.
It was pretty fun. I had a lot of, there are a lot of friends of mine.

Tanja lives with her parents and her brother. She has video conversations with them

every two to three weeks, when she is not too busy. Her father was the first one to suggest that

she study abroad, so her family is very supportive of this endeavor.

I have a brother, I love him, we have a really good relationship.

And I have my parents, we live in the in a flat it's not as big as a house but it's
fine.
It started, my dad always as he just mentioned (studying abroad) but it's like yeah,
I could think about it and I was always like, oh but I have my best friend here, I
don’t wanna leave them alone. So I just forgot it, and he just always said a little
bit but not really so I had no pressure at all.

Deciding to study abroad. Her quiet nature prevented her from considering a year

abroad, but she was encouraged when one of her very shy friends decided to study abroad.

Another friend came to me and she was like oh, I’m going to England next year
and she’s really shy and like not really outgoing, like even worse than me, so I
was like, if she can do it, I can do it too!

Her goals for studying abroad emphasize a strong desire to broaden her horizons, try new things

and acquire skills, including English, that will serve her in future career goals.
TEENAGERS ABROAD 96

I wanna do something with languages, I just wanna work, I love traveling so I

mean, with English you know.

Tanja had to decide to repeat one year of high school in her home country in order to study

abroad. This was a difficult decision as it meant that most of her friends would now be in a

different class. She explains how she came to accept this situation:

I think it’s better if you have a year of experience and you look at your whole life
differently than I dunno, do it later and I mean, I see so many things differently
now.

She completed the application and wrote the introduction letter to her host family without great

difficulty, and went to an interview in English she found equally easy. She was accepted quickly

thereafter.

Tanja’s English proficiency.

In the beginning… During her mid-program English proficiency evaluation, Tanja

obtained a score of 94% for oral proficiency in the John Test, and was placed in the highest

proficiency group by a full-time ESL faculty based on her short writing sample.

Tanja feels that her English was reasonably good upon her arrival, but noticed a definite

gap between listening-speaking vs. reading-writing skills, as well as between listening and

speaking. At first, she could understand most of what was said to her, but resorted to gestures

and pointing when trying to express herself.

So I could write kind of but talking was, I mean it was fine, understanding is
easier, but then when I was talking I was like, I used my hands and my feet.
But it was hard for me to speak actually, it still is kind of.

When recollecting her beginnings in the United States, Tanja remembers being nervous about

speaking English. She says that early on:

TEENAGERS ABROAD 97

I was more insecure, I think I wasn’t really talking.

And just to like, just to watch out what you're saying (and avoid mistakes). That
was the biggest challenge.

Later on, she explains:

In the beginning I was afraid to talk because I was afraid I would make mistakes
all the time.

On the other hand, she was quite comfortable with listening:

I pretty much got it, not ‘cause I knew everything but from the context, I guess.

In other words, Tanja felt a gap between what she could understand, almost everything she

heard, and what she could express confidently, which was not enough.She felt more comfortable

with producing writing and grammar, as she had in her classes in her home country. In fact, she

explains that, in her home country, most of her classes emphasized essay writing, which she felt

very comfortable with.

I was like the best in (English) class (in home country) but it was because I can
write stuff so, eh, we never talked, we never really spoke in our English class.
When you write you have more time to think about it and then when you speak
then it's like, oops, too late!

She believes that her ability to write in English explains why she was at the top of her English

class before arriving to the United States.

Throughout the program… Tanja learned to relax and to let go of her insecurities about

making mistakes. When offering advice to other international students in her situation, she says

Just make your mistakes! It’s not like they are getting mad at you unless you say
something really weird and rude.
TEENAGERS ABROAD 98

As the program progresses, she realizes that she can carry out most of her daily tasks in English

without thinking about what she will say first. For some specific conversations, however, she

still finds it necessary to focus on her speaking.

I have more fun I can laugh about myself.

In the beginning I was afraid to talk because I was afraid I would make mistakes
all the time, and now I'm like, as long as people know what I'm trying to say it's
fine I can just talk.
If I’m talking about politics, you have to watch out, but like small talk is fine.

She has noticed that her mistakes have taught her a lot, and she believes that they are universally

valuable.

I learn from making mistakes, and if I don’t speak I don't make mistakes. I mean
you understand people but you don’t really remember all the phrases and stuff,
but if you say a phrase and you say it wrong, everybody's like, he he it’s funny!
Oh ok, and the next time you remember’ cause you had this embarrassing
moment.

Tanja notices that she has learned when she is able to pick up on other people’s regional

or national accents, which she was not able to do at the beginning of her stay.

But now I can like in the beginning I couldn’t tell who's like, who's speaking
British English, and who's, and now I can like if somebody talks like British I'm
like ok, it sounds really really weird. Or like the South, the Southern accent.

Tanja also finds that a lot of the English she learned as a foreign exchange student, she

could not possibly have learned as a foreign language student in her home country:

You just learn more specific vocabulary because you have like school and stuff
and more, eh, slang and stuff that we never learn in (home country). (…) Like the
bad words. No but like, yea like all the phrases, like little things like go with the
flow, little things that you wouldn’t remember.
TEENAGERS ABROAD 99

In fact, when recollecting what she has learned, Tanja mostly remembers vocabulary and

expressions.

Tanja is a resourceful young woman: she downloaded a bilingual dictionary to her cell

phone, which she uses as a last resort when she cannot understand a word, or when she is unsure

about its meaning. She explains that she used to think she understood the English word

eventually because of a similar-sounding German word. She was left puzzled by conversations

where her understanding did not make sense, so she looked it up in her phone, only to realize

these two words were false cognates and their meanings quite different.

Learning English.

Host family. Tanja was placed in a host family with three children, all younger than she

is. Although she is normally more comfortable with adults, she has developed sincere affection

for her host siblings. Her host family brings her the balance and activity she seeks. She is

involved in their church community, and participates in many social gatherings with her host

parents. She loves the interesting and challenging conversations she has with them and with their

friends.

I love my host family. They're the best ever. I couldn’t be happier.

Tanja loves her host family, which is made up of a mother, a father and three children, all

younger than Tanja. She explains that she acquired the language needed for daily life with her

host family quickly and painlessly. Beyond the basics though, she is happy to report:

With my host family I learn like a lot. ‘Cause you can talk with them like long and
good talks about everything. We talk about the world, about the life…

She goes on to explain why her host father is such an exceptional person to learn from.
TEENAGERS ABROAD 100

I can talk with my host dad for hours so I learn like a lot because he teaches me a
lot and he likes to teach. He has an opinion, and he's telling you his opinion,
without like forcing the opinion on you or whatever.

Outside of the interesting conversations with her host father in particular, she claims she

might not have learned words such as narcissism or shallow. She believes her host father’s

attitude and personality, his choice of language that is more complicated that what she normally

hears elsewhere, as well as the special connection they have, allows her to learn so much from

him. Her host father taught her:

Narcissism and stuff. Words that you wouldn't learn in school usually. Maybe, but
not in my class.

In addition, with her host family, she also knows what language is appropriate and what is not.

She would not use cuss or vulgar words because of her young host siblings.

It's a weird topic but like cuss words. Like at home we talk more like language,
like for my host sisters and brothers cause like (they are) 6 years or 7, and 13 and
11, so we talk more about stuff that is for them. (…) But then if I talk alone with
my host parents, then we use like more like deeper language, then it's more
complicated I think.

On the other hand, she also notes that outside of these interesting conversations, mopst of lthe

learning happens at the beginning and lessons learned are applied over and over again with

limited opportunities for change or additional learning.

At home it's like, you learn most of it (quickly). Like words like rag or, I didn't
know. You just know and you say it every day. You don't really go out of what you
say.

Peers. Most of her friends in the United States are other international students. Although

she cares about them very much, she wishes she had the time to develop deeper relationships
TEENAGERS ABROAD 101

with her American peers. Unfortunately, she has not been able to get past superficial friendships

outside of her host family.

You just feel like you have to watch out. If you go too deep too fast, then they go
away and so you just keep like, (…) hi, how are you?
But with some (American peers) it's just like hi and you look so cute! Not really
deep. I don't really care for that so.

Tanja does see value in small talk in that she learned how to socialize. What frustrates her is the

inability to go beyond that initial socialization. In a journal response, she writes:

It’s not like Americans are superficial, it just seems like that until you get to know
them well. And it’s a long way to get to that point.

Tanja notices that her learning within school differs in quantity and in quality depending

on the specific context. Overall, she finds that she learned the least from peers. About joining the

basketball team, she says:

I didn't really learn anything. You learn some like those like the basketball terms
but that's not a lot.
Sports was not the perfect ones. I mean basketball, C squad with the freshman but
that's ok, it was an experience, it was not my favorite but you know.

She does not regret this experience but ranks it as one of the poorest learning experiences

overall, along with lunch breaks:

I think there I learned the least because there is nothing new and you're just
talking like small talk all the time and like how are you? I'm fine and na na na,
bye! And then you're gone and then you eat all the time and then you can’t talk.

Unfortunately, she was not able to get to a point where she felt as close to a domestic peer as she

did with her host family. She does, however, note how much slang she was able to learn through

small talk with her American peers, including her host sister who is fairly close to her in age:
TEENAGERS ABROAD 102

Sometimes I think I say like too much like, like like! It it's not horrible it's just
funny to notice all those likes saying like. I got this from my host sister. Because
she always says like it was one of the first things I said like all the time. Oh no!

Later, responding to the researcher asking where she learned to use the word like:

That's more like students. Everybody does it so…

Tanja felt safe with her international exchange student friends. She feels it as easier to

become close to them than it was to become close to American peers. In friendships, she

appreciates challenging conversations and her international friends were able to provide them.

They’re not like oh you look so cute you know, this shallow talk. It's, we don't
really do it and so you have this more like deep relationship. You talk about other
stuff then it's like… It sounds weird, I know.

However, Tanja never spoke about her international friends as people she learned English from.

Classroom. Classes in general are much easier than at home, with an exception or two.

Teachers are very approachable. Tanja also notices that to change classmates with every subject

can create challenges to develop friendships. She also feels that teachers are generally friendlier

in the United States that they are in her home country:

(In home country) It's harder. (…) I came here and I'm so excited ‘cause it's
English and I, but then it was really easy and teachers are more personal I guess.
You can just ask them. I'm always like, yea, can you help me with this word and I
think my (home country) teachers would be so annoyed.

Tanja believes that she has learned in all of her classes because of how specialized they are. She

explains:

You have six different classes so you have six different fields that you learn and
then you learn it more intense.
In school you learn like technical words, you learn words like, eh, ok now I don’t
know any!
TEENAGERS ABROAD 103

Most of her classes are far easier than what she was used to in her home country, but she finds

she learned a lot in subjects such as civics and politics in particular, which were relatively

challenging.

I have one class, it was like civics and now it's CWA, which I kind of think is like
my hardest class, it's like, (…) like a medium (home country) class, (…) but you
have to study.

Nevertheless, she did not pressure herself to get the grades she expected of herself at

home:

I mean last time I had straight A’s and I was like, ok!
The second semester I was like I don't care, it doesn't count for me anyway.

She thinks that if classes had been more challenging for her academically, and had required more

group work and oral presentations, she might have had more opportunities to learn.

I dunno, I don't have a comparison (but) I probably learned less. Because like
(…) I don't have that much homework and like. Like in (home country) we have a
lot of like, group work and presentations and stuff (…) to prepare all the time and
speaking in front of people and here I don't really have that so.

Personality & risk taking. As mentioned earlier, Tanja strives for excellence. She enjoys

the challenges that the classroom provide. This is apparent in her efforts to speak without

mistakes at the beginning of her stay and in her commenting about her English, she explains:

I’m not perfect.

In addition, upon her return home, she hopes her English will continue to progress:

I hope so badly that it’s gonna stay like this or it’s gonna improve.
TEENAGERS ABROAD 104

She is generally rather introverted, relying on her best friend’s extroversion at home.

She's really outgoing I'm not usually and… I came here, I was like, I didn't say
anything, was like I don't wanna meet anyone. I just can't talk to new people. And
so she's like totally different.
I mean I'm like, I can't go to like a group of people like hello, hi, how are you?
That’s just… no!

At first, her shyness prevented her from talking to people. But later on, she slowly

became more comfortable:

Then I found my friends, like my group of friends, and then it was easier when you
have a base where you can go like kind of stretch out.

When asked whether she would change anything to her experience, she responds:
I don’t think so like I'm pretty happy. Probably like my personality like, at the
beginning I was more insecure I think, and like I wasn't really talking.

When asked whether extroversion contributed to good language learning, she responded

unequivocally:

It's true.(…) Like the beginning was tough for me but now I know.

She believes that increased confidence would have helped increase opportunities for learning, as

she believes she learns through mistakes. Throughout the program, Tanja has noticed some

changes in her choices. First, she is much less shy than she used to be, and she believes that this

change, although not dramatic, will stay with her upon her return home. She feels she has grown

through all her experiences, including the less pleasant ones such as her participation in the

basketball team. However, she does not feel that her personality has changed dramatically:

I think I'm more, I'm a bit more secure if I go back to (home country) that I can go
to people, but it's still not like, like, hi. It' just not my character and I started to
accept that. If I started to change that then it would be wrong.
TEENAGERS ABROAD 105

In spite of this, she claims that in the past, she would not have taken many of the risks she

now takes relatively easily. She emphasizes the need to talk to people, no matter what the

situation is. When asked whether her willingness to take risks has improved:

Oh yea, I think so, just trying to talk. (…)Sometimes I know the word kind of, but I
know the translation so I don’t really know exactly what it means but I know in
what context to use it so I'm pretty sure. (…) So I'm just using it and hopefully it's
right. I have this for like exaggerating I think.

She believes the change came hand in hand with the experience of studying abroad, which, for

her, required the ability not to take herself seriously at all times.

Just like using every day. You get kind of stuck if you don't do it (take risks in
conversations).(…) and I know that people won't like kill me if I (make a mistake)
just like oh, ha ha ha ha! You can laugh with them.

She compares it to learning to ski:

It's more like if you go to skiing vacation and you go on the lift. In the beginning
it's hard to get on and then you go up and then if you learned it perfectly, then you
can ski down.

She reflects on her growth throughout the year:

I think you just grow in your head. (…) I mean, you learn to accept like eating
sweet and salty together, which I still, I'm still working on that! Like bacon and
pancake, like, ok! You know, you learn to be more open minded. (…) I mean my
head is full language, like there’s more I can express myself (with).

In other words, she embraces the maturity that come with being away from family in a foreign

country, learning a different language and different habits.

Summary. Tanja is a shy young woman, who has had to step outside of her comfort zone

to study abroad, and to create relationships. She is aware of her growth through this experience,

and has learned to take herself less seriously than she used to. She is comfortable in the
TEENAGERS ABROAD 106

classroom and her host parents, and generally with any adults who are eager to share knowledge

with her.

Julie: You try to blend in and be like the Americans

Julie is a motivated, hardworking young woman who knows what it will take to

accomplish the academic and professional goals she is setting for herself. She is responsible,

thoughtful, and faithful to those she cares about.

English education in Julie’s country. Julie’s country scores very high in overall English

proficiency. Surprisingly, when compared to the other four countries in this study, Julie’s

country has the smallest number of required hours for foreign language instruction in secondary

education (Eurydice & Eurostat, 2012).

Life in Julie’s home country. Julie grew up in a large city, and has one older sibling.

She is very close to her family and misses the family weekend traditions they share. She has

video conversations with her family weekly. It is reassuring for her to know that they will be

there when she returns. She explains,

Eh, I’m really close with my sister. She’s not at home a lot but when she is we
always like together and get in her room or my room and just talk or have fun.
And, and then I’m also really close with my mom. We do a lot of stuff
together.(…) I spend a lot of time with my family, we’re really close.

What she misses the most about her hometown are her family and friends, as well as the

independence she had thanks to public transportation and the ability to go place via bicycle.

(I miss) taking public transportation and I, having, I had a bike so it was like
super easy to just like get around and, yeah, go places. Here you always have to
get a ride and I feel bad.

Julie has three best friends with whom she spends most of the free time she does not

spend with family. She likes going to cafes and going shopping with them.
TEENAGERS ABROAD 107

I have like three best friends, really close, spend a lot of time together. And yeah,
I can talk to them about everything so that’s really nice.

She also believes that, although more difficult than in the United States, school has not

been too demanding for her, thus giving her time for summer jobs.

The school I went to it wasn’t that difficult, so I have a lot of free time and I had
two jobs like in the summer months.
I had like 2 essays a year so that was really easy. But in general it’s more difficult
(than the U.S.).

One of her first memories of English, which she started to study in the third grade, was

her teacher telling her that her linguistic ability was a lost cause. In her first essay, she writes:

In 5th grade, my English teacher told me that my English was horrible and there
was nothing he could do to help me.

At that time, her language classes focused on grammar. She did not give up. Her high school

English teacher emphasized speaking, which she enjoyed. In addition, TV shows and movies are

not dubbed but merely subtitled in her native language, so she heard English spoken on most

days.

We have, we have English TV, with TV shows there, and movies and I think that
have helped me improve my English because you listen to English almost every
day, so you get the pronunciation, and like the speaking easier. And my teacher,
he was like, we have to speak English a lot so that really helped me.

Deciding to study abroad. Julie says she has always been interested in the United States

and U.S. culture. She writes:

I have always been very interested in America and the American culture and I
always wanted to discover other/different ways to live.
TEENAGERS ABROAD 108

In fact, her mother also spent a year in the United States. One of Julie's older siblings' friends had

been an exchange student to the United States, which is when she first considered doing the

same.

Well, I’ve thought about it for many years because one of my good friends, her
big sister, she was an exchange student as well and she was oh it’s amazing so
I’ve been thinking about it for about it like since 6th grade.

She researched opportunities and saved money from her summer jobs for two years to

study abroad. She took the personality and English tests, provided her personal information and

was quickly placed into a host family. She was able to video chat with them about once a week

for one to two hours for over six months prior to her arrival.

(I) already got the family in January so that was really nice
I talked to my host family really early.

Julie’s English proficiency.

In the beginning… Julie’s English proficiency early on in the study was very high. Her

language was very accurate, her pronunciation excellent and fluent. Julie claims that, upon her

arrival, her:

English was okay.

In her first essay, she explains that:

One of my goals was definitely to improve it and speak it fluently

(…) and speak English like an American.
TEENAGERS ABROAD 109

She noticed a big difference between the speaking she did in her home country's

classroom, with notes and preparation and the unrehearsed, impromptu video conversations she

had with her host family prior to her arrival.

I talked to my host family really early, and I could really feel like my English
improving when Skyping with them. Because it was like one or two hours every
week I just spoke with them without paper, notes, anything. So it was, I could
really feel a difference from like in the beginning of the year last year, and then in
the end my English, especially like talking to them, and so it really helped me a
lot.

Having watched movies and TV series in English daily for a long time, having practiced

conversation with her host family prior to her arrival and having read large books in English in

her spare time, her understanding was very good. Speaking, on the other hand was more difficult.

I would say reading and listening, understanding (were the easiest). Basically I
understood everything before I came here. I could understand everything people
said but it was a little a challenge, like kinda, going from the (native language) to
the English and start speaking English and get the sentence right.

Throughout the program…Particularly at the beginning of her experience, she had good

days and bad days in English. On the bad days, she felt she could not speak properly. In May,

she writes:

I don't feel like it happens that much often anymore which is really nice, but there
are always days when your English is worse.

When reflecting upon her improvement, Julie states:

My vocabulary have improved a lot and pronunciation, like getting more like the
English accent, eh American. (…) And grammar as well.

She also feels that her speaking has improved to the point where she can have a conversation

without difficulties, most of the time.

TEENAGERS ABROAD 110

Now it's like your English is super smooth and it's like on a flow and it's super
great. It can be like, there's a lot of ups and downs but I think we're coming to a
point where it's mostly like good days because, you're always, we're speaking for
almost six months now.

She also reports that she occasionally stumbles upon her words, which frustrates her. She

adds:

I hear myself speak in my head, like I caught myself saying the sentence like,
wrong, (...) and then I say like a lot and it annoys me.

Julie explains that she hears herself speak:

I pay more attention (…) when there's like pressure on you, you're really
concentrate and like, say it super correctly.

Learning English.

Host family. As mentioned earlier on, Julie was able to communicate with her host

parents (no children live at home with them) prior to her arrival, thereby establishing a

relationship with them before she met them. Julie is comfortable with her host family: they are

the ones she asks for rides whenever she needs to go somewhere. She explains:

They’re retired. (…) Both really sweet.

Another foreign exchange student, Mia, stayed with the same host family. The two

developed a very strong relationship. Julie explains, to and about Mia:

We talk about basically everything and it's like friends and sisters, it's really nice.
I dunno what I would have done if I didn't have you. It would be really really like,
sad and boring.

She explains that her host parents were key in teaching them English:
TEENAGERS ABROAD 111

Our host family have definitely (...) taught us a lot of English and, like, don't say it
like that, say this.

They volunteered suggestions as they saw fit, which is something her friends or teachers would

not normally do as freely. Julie's host father has taught her that using the word like as much as

she and her other friends do is:

One of the bad habits of English.

She claims:

It makes you sound stupid if you can't explain something without using the word
like.

Peers. Julie spends a lot of time with Mia. Since Mia's proficiency level was lower and

since the two got along from the beginning, Julie naturally took on the role of a teacher with her.

She helps her finish sentences when Mia is unsure how to pronounce a word and Mia will often

ask her for help. She says to Mia, half-jokingly:

But I'm just worried that I give you the wrong answer here. You always listen to
me.

All in all, having another exchange student staying with her has made Julie's life more

comfortable in the United States.

Julie is impressed by how many people she has been able to meet, thanks to her mixed

schedule.

Well, I met a lot of new people, it’s we meet so much more and (…) well in the
classes mostly and in the hall it’s just crazy between the class!

But the number of people she has met has not translated into what she had hoped:
TEENAGERS ABROAD 112

I would really like to have really good American friends because then you really
learn the way to speak like the Americans and get it correct. And you get
influenced by their pronunciation as well.

She explains that, for many reasons:

It’s just really difficult to make friends.

Julie feels that, once the novelty of meeting a new international student (which she finds

offensive) wears off, few of her domestic peers want to invest much time and effort into a

friendship that may not last past the academic year:

They know that you're only here for a year.

I mean, you can have fun with people but you, you don’t like, tell them you know
how you feel if you’re, feel bad. (…) In the beginning they’re like, oh you’re an
exchange student that’s so cool! And it kinda feel like a puppy because, oh, so
cute oh, I want an exchange student!

In addition, she feels that knowing so many people may contribute to preventing relationships

from becoming deeper:

But I think it’s kinda cool that you meet so many different people in each class
you get to talk to a lot of people. (…) But it’s kind of different because you get
close to the people you spend more time with (in home country). But here’s, it’s
kinda more on the surface. It’s more like, yeah we know each other, we have fun
together, but we don’t really know each other.

Julie did join one of the basketball team in the winter. However, most of their teammates

were freshmen and she found it difficult to connect with them due to maturity differences.

I don’t know but we were on the C squad (whether it helped improve their
English).
Well, we had a lot of fun with the exchange students. But (…) you didn’t really get
too like close with (the other team members) ‘cause they’re kinda childish.
TEENAGERS ABROAD 113

If she could go back, she would play a different sport, and she would choose one from the

beginning of the school year, to see if that would make a difference.

I kinda regret not doing any sports at the beginning sport in the fall. (…) Like I
really regret not doing that in the beginning because it really helps, I mean not
being alone.

She also wonders if it might have made a difference to be placed in a larger school instead of a

small one.

I feel like in a bigger school you get the real high school experience compared to
like here, it's way smaller, it like, it's kind of a really small community and
everybody knows each other.

Overall, she also wishes she had been more outgoing from the beginning, so that she

could have increased her opportunities to make friends.

You have to be really outgoing. It takes a lot of energy.

Of her personality, she says:

I'll be kind of in the middle (between introverted and extroverted), I'm not like
Irene and Marla, they talk with everyone.

She describes the whole experience of going up to strangers and gathering the energy to talk to

domestic students at school:

It can be really like scary, and it's really difficult but in the same time it's really
fulfilling when you, like saw some results. (Early on) I was telling my friends, like,
I haven't laughed in like three weeks and (...) haven't felt really, really happy and
but then it came and you feel like, ok, this is really great and I really like being
here. But, like it takes a lot of time to make new friends but it can be tiring.
TEENAGERS ABROAD 114

On bad days, she does not have the energy to do this, but when she is in a good mood, this

experience energizes her as she knows it helps her English. She also learns from peers (or adults,

in this case) by paying close attention to conversations she finds more challenging.

When you can hear like people using more difficult word and having a really
interesting conversation you, you listen more and you like, get interested and
want to learn what they're talking about. And be able to speak like them because
it's kinda cool that they're able to speak like really well and yea proper English.

Despite her disappointment with the basketball experience, she believes it helped

strengthen her relationships with other international students. They are the ones she usually sits

with at lunch, and they often socialize together.

So we're not really exposed to American-American English so we, I dunno if we

speak correctly, but we speak to each other.
It was really fun in the beginning, ‘cause all of us were like new with English so,
(we had to) speak slower and understand each other.

She writes in a journal:

You often get the question "who is better at english of the exchange students?" so
sometimes i feel like there is a competition between us, but i suppose that is good
so we can motivate each other.

Julie feels a lot of pressure to demonstrate a high level of proficiency when she goes home.

I'm just a little, not nervous but a little worried about when I get back (to home
country) saying something that's actually grammatically incorrect but learned it
here as a slang (...). I'm gonna be good at English when I get back but there are
some many people in (home country) who's really good at English.

She does not feel that a year abroad will necessarily give her an academic or professional

advantage over her classmates. She fears her language skills, particularly what she has learned

listening to other teenagers, may not be appropriate in the context she will return to. In addition:
TEENAGERS ABROAD 115

I don't think that they (teenagers) care so much about like if it's grammatically
correct.

For Julie, the usage of the word like is one of those speaking habits that differentiate

teenagers from adults and that may not be acceptable when she returns home. She has analyzed

its usage in some depth. Although she thinks she learned it from hearing many people use it, she

thinks she adopted it primarily because it is a convenient way to help explain a word or a concept

when she does not have the exact vocabulary to do so. She also understands its use to add

character to speaking, and that it differentiates speaking from writing.

In the beginning when you have a little trouble you have to ok, I don't really know
this word but then I try to explain it, you say: it's like this and it's also like this.
Then it becomes a habit.
It is a good time saver when I just need time to think about the word.
I feel it gives like an emotion to speaking (…) and it's so boring if you sound like a
book all the time.

Classroom. Generally, Julie finds that classes in the United States have been relatively

easy.

For example right now in English class we're doing a book, well the teacher is
reading it for us.
Teachers are way more helpful. In Europe you get an assignment and then you do
it on your own. You don't get class time to do it, really.

My easy classes are cooking and photography so you don't have to do a lot, it's

just you cook and…

She did take an Advanced Placement Economics class that she found challenging.

It was in the beginning of the year so I didn't know all the words so I struggled
with some things. It took me a long time because I didn't understand and I had to
re-read a lot. There was a lot of homework too.
TEENAGERS ABROAD 116

When comparing the two different types of classes, the easy ones versus the difficult ones, Julie

does enjoy an academic challenge.

I feel like in the easy classes you just you don't give as much attention as the
difficult because I’m kinda like that if I get a challenge, I wanna, like complete it
and get it right so if something is difficult I like try harder.
It's more fun. You communicate more on a regular basis compared with classes
where you need concentration. .I feel like you learn more (in the challenging
classes) but the other ones are like nice, and you talk to other people. You get like
the basic English.

In other words, the easier classes feel more like a continuation of time spent with peers outside of

class, which is enjoyable and also a place to learn English for social functions. More challenging

classes teach her content and vocabulary she would not learn otherwise. When assessing what

her experience is about, she claims that, overall:

It’s not just all studying, it's also the social part (that is important).

In fact, her grades in the United States do not matter for her once she returns home.

In general, Julie rarely raises her hand with language related questions during class. She

confides

It’s not embarrassing but it's just like, I don't really like it if like I don't
understand it, you, you feel stupid.

She prefers to ask questions to teachers one-on-one, or in conversation in general. One of the

classes she found most helpful to improve her English was sophomore English. In that class, two

to three times a week, they receive a grammatically incorrect paragraph from a story, with no

punctuation.

In English class , (…) like we do this little like paragraph and we have to correct
it.
TEENAGERS ABROAD 117

But then we correct it and I feel like I learn something every time we do it because
then I have maybe like two or three thing I have to correct, that I got wrong and
then she, my teacher, she explains it and why it's that way so then we remember it
for the next time. (…) If we have to like move the sentence around if it's, it's not
the right way to say, then I get really confused. (Or) where to put (words) because
I don't really have that experience, like this is how Americans would say it.

In general, Julie appreciates grammar and having rules broken down and explained. She

feels that this experience will help her tremendously when she returns home. She also finds that

this experience helps her recapture some of what she learned previously.

It was (…) in middle school (that we studied grammar) so you kinda forget it a
bit, and then like get it up again and start studying it again.

Personality & risk taking. For Julie, taking risks in English amounts to making extra

efforts to meet and talk to American peers, as described earlier. In a way, taking risks is not

allowing yourself to have an off day. Her willingness to try depends on whether she's having a

good day. In addition, speaking in front of her class was particularly challenging at the onset of

her experience.

Well I feel like now I'm more brave. I just say something in English like in front of
the class like it's normal. In the beginning it's like, I'm gonna say something
wrong now, or can people understand me?

Julie feels she is taking risks when she uses new words she has recently heard or learned.

(When) you hear a word and then you use it in a sentence, like, later. (You are
not completely sure what it means) but you use it anyway.

She agrees with Mia that using cuss words can be taking a risk as well, because she has no

emotional attachment to the words and cannot predict how people will react to them.

It’s just like worse in your own language compared to like other (languages)
‘cause like we don't really think that we get the true meaning of the word.
TEENAGERS ABROAD 118

In addition to taking risks, Julie feels she has adjusted her personality to be an exchange student.

She claims:

Here you really have to go out there and be social and talk to everybody and just.
Like always have this happy mood, you can't really have those off days like at the
beginning because then people get this like this bad impression of you.
I think it helps when you've very outgoing and you hear more English and you
improve your own when you speak like compared to like the person lonely sitting
in the corner without like anybody.

Her behavior has changed to reflect this experience:

I really try to like be really sweet and in (home country) I can be kinda mean
actually.

When trying to understand why she has adjusted her behavior, she says:

You get like kinda two personalities, like new one for when you're in America and
another one when you're with your friends and family. Maybe you're just
influenced by the people here a lot. You try to blend in and be like the Americans.
It would be weird if I was exactly like I was in (home country) here.

Summary. Julie is a quiet student, who works hard to achieve her goals. She has high

expectations for herself and who thinks ahead to the future. Not surprisingly given her

personality, she arrived with a very high level of proficiency and was very comfortable in her

new role as Mia’s mentor and sister. Although she wants to stay in touch with her new family in

particular, she will not lose sight of the academic demands, including in terms of English

vernacular preferences, that she will have to face upon her return.
TEENAGERS ABROAD 119

Mia: Because I'm a teenager and here all the teenagers do it

Mia is a cheerful young lady, who has recently discovered her ambition to have a life

unlike anyone else's. Mia enjoys every moment of her life and does not give up in the face of

adversity. She is honest and faithful to those she loves.

English education in Mia’s country. Mia’s country received a low proficiency grade,

with some of the lowest overall proficiency in the region. However, an upwards trend was noted

in recent years. The country has been exploring reforms, including ones emphasizing English

education, as most of the population agrees that English proficiency must improve in the future

to ensure better economic prospects (Education First, 2013; EF Education First Ltd., 2012b;

Eurydice & Eurostat, 2012). As noted previously, Mia’s home country has similar requirements

as Jefferson’s and Irene’s in terms of required number of hours of English through secondary

education (Eurydice & Eurostat, 2012).

Life in Mia’s home country. Mia grew up in a small town with her two older siblings

and her parents. She is very close to both her siblings who are somewhere between best friends

and young parents to her.

I’m very, very close with my sister because I’m 17, she’s 20. We’re like just 3
years. And so she’s like a best friend for me. And I’m also close with brother.
He’s kind of like dad. Not, not really a dad but I, I don’t know, I super young dad.
And with my mom it’s like normal relationship, the same with my dad so.
Sometimes we fight, sometimes no… Especially in this age!

In her hometown, she enjoys going for walks and the nightlife, and she likes the small

community feel where everyone knows everyone.

Usually, like we go to this city, and we walk like on the street because it’s like a
main street with a lot of bars and food café but… And so we like, we like, meet
people. Also my friends from my school like in, in the bar or sometimes, there is
also like, a, I don’t know, like a party that this city organize.
TEENAGERS ABROAD 120

She explains that her life revolved around school. During the week, she did not have time for

much other than going to school for six or seven hours a day and doing homework in the

evening. However, she spent her weekends with a handful of very close friends.

I don't have really a lot of friends but the person (...) I'm friends with they are like
very close to me so I can like tell them everything, like how I feel. So I think it's
nicer, because you feel like comfy with some people and that’s nice.

She uses social media and video conversations to keep in touch with her friends and family. She

adds:

But right now I don't really miss them because I know that they will be there for
me forever and they will wait for me, and Americans it's only for like ten months.

Mia started taking English classes in elementary school, where language lessons focused on

written exercises.

It's different because you never talk with someone in English because the course
teacher will explain, like talk (native language).

In addition, despite studying appropriately, she struggled quite a bit in English class:

Before I come here I was really bad in English, really bad. I almost failed my
English class so maybe (I should have) study more. But I actually studied. I dunno
why I was so bad.

Deciding to study abroad. Mia remembers a few years ago, she would not even have

considered studying abroad.

I was super scared, I was like no, I would never (spend so much time away from
home).
TEENAGERS ABROAD 121

But then her siblings encouraged her to consider it, encouraging her to try new things and to take

a different path. Her family's encouragements finally convinced her, and she completed the

application process.

But then like my brother talk with me and, I dunno, he was like you have to go,
you have to do something in your life, you have like to be independent like to try
new things. And this is right I mean, now that we’re here, I like have a view of the
life, and I wanna do a lot of stuff. I’m not even sure if I want to go like go to
university because it’s like, okay go to university then find a job and then have a
family so it’s like a kinda boring. I mean I wanna do something different.

Mia was placed into her host family much later than most students. She had almost given up on

ever coming when she received information about her placement. Because of this delay, she

missed the first few days of school.

I had (a placement) super, super late! Like in the end of August I was like ok, I’m
not going. And then they call: oh yeah!

Mia’s English proficiency.

In the beginning… Mia’s English proficiency was the lowest of the group, although it

was upper intermediate. Her strongest skills were fluency. Her accuracy, both grammatical and

pronunciation, were noticeably lower than the rest of the group’s.

Mia is well aware that her English proficiency at the start was much lower than that of

some of her foreign exchange peers, in particular Julie's, who lives with her. When asked about

her English when she first arrived, she is very clear:

Ok. I was terrible. Really terrible.

Later on she adds:

I was terrible also my pronunciation was terrible and it's still terrible.
TEENAGERS ABROAD 122

I have I still have problems with pronunciation ‘cause, like (native language)
accent is very difficult to delete

She is concerned about her accent in particular, as she feels hers is very difficult to delete. The

most difficult aspect when she first arrived was understanding people, quickly followed by

speaking. She explains:

At the beginning, I understand just thank you and bye. That sounds impossible
but...
Now since I arrive I mean the beginning I couldn’t understand movie, now I can.
I could understand when people like write something but when they speak, I was
like what going on, like, I can't understand you.

For Mia, there was no difference between Julie, her host parents, her classmates or her teachers

speaking: they were all; difficult to understand. Reading, however, was a bit more comfortable,

though she was a slow reader.

Throughout the program… However, Mia is proud to say that her language skills have

improved all around. She is a faster reader (almost as fast as in her native language), she

understands people much more (though she still often has questions), including movies and the

lyrics in Julie's music collection, and she thinks her grammar is more accurate. Her vocabulary

has also improved, although in some conversations, her gaps in vocabulary still hold her back.

She still wants to make more progress, but she is proud of how far she's already come.

She explains that, in order to keep improving her language, she sometimes listens to herself very

carefully.

Sometimes I say it wrong and then, wait! Try to correct myself.

This happens particularly when she is speaking with the intent to practice her English. Other

times she says she is less careful when she is simply making small talk:
TEENAGERS ABROAD 123

Sometime I talk just for talk ‘cause I wanna talk with Julie. Sometimes I wanna
talk because I want like a, practice my English so when I wanna practice, like
right now, practice my English. It depends...

Mia is relatively aware of her own learning. In a journal entry, she writes:

It’s hard to think what I learned recently, because I'm learning something new
evry day, evry moment. Probably I'll learn something also now, while I'm writing
this e-mail. (like word spelling etc).

When Julie and the researcher help her with the pronunciation of a word during an interview, she

brings this learning up later in the interview:

Maybe it was also today last time I learned something. Like right now,(I learned)
horoscope.

Her reading has also improved significantly:

And also reading, at the beginning like. one hour for one page it was like, what
does it mean? What does it mean? But now like normal, slower than (native
language) but…

She feels she learns grammar along with everything else, without ever having to focus on it.

When giving advice to hypothetical international exchange students, she suggests:

Don’t really focus on the grammar because you will learn it. If you learn how to
talk with a person you will of course learn the grammar, so just talk a lot.

Mia has had epiphany-like moments when she realized she was able to understand

something she was not able to understand before. For example, she explains that one of her

teachers was particularly difficult to understand at the beginning, because she was a fast speaker.

I improved a lot. At first, I have Johnson, my teacher at the beginning it was like,
wow she talks really faster! And I couldn't understand her. But now it seems like
TEENAGERS ABROAD 124

she's talking like in easier, but actually it's not she that is talking easier, it's me
that, I can understand more.

She finds that watching TV and movies are a very helpful way to learn new expressions and

authentic idioms.

I had much fun, if it translated in (native language) it doesn’t really make sense.
You say it another way so it's like learn these (expressions) listening people talk
in movies or also in real life it helps you a lot.

She is also surprised at her ability to understand songs she did not used to understand.

In the beginning maybe I can understand movie, but with the song it's different
because you have also like the music in the background and so sometimes, I can't
understand. But now, really not for all the songs, but I can understand what they
say, like wow! And like maybe songs that I used also to listen in (home country).
Now (…) they have a meaning for me.

She occasionally surprises herself by saying things she did not realize she could say:

Just talking and like explaining something and like, wow, I was able to say it!
Good job, Mia!

Finally, she has noticed that, after a few weeks, she started to have short thoughts in English,

like:

Oh, where is my pen?

For most of the duration of her stay, her thoughts were a mix of the two languages. In a journal,

she explains:

Sometimes (...) I don't know the translation in English of a perfect (native

language) word that expresses completely how I feel or what I wanna say;
sometimes it doesn't even exist in the English vocabulary. So it's a little hard to
communicate, to make the person I'm talking to, really understand. In those cases
I can only be flexible and accept it. But I'm always a little mad about it, because I
TEENAGERS ABROAD 125

like to express myself as well as possible, and to make people understand exactly
what I'm saying.

This results in Mia sometimes wishing her closest friends could understand her native language,

so that she could communicate on a different level with them.

Learning English.

Host family. Mia mostly agreed with Julie's comments about their host parents. She

agreed that they were very helpful for their language development. She also agrees that their host

father is the one who insists that using the word like as much as teenagers do is not a good habit.

She thinks this might be because he is concerned this linguistic habit may hold them back.

He thinks maybe they wanna learn English well. So maybe they think if you start
in simple way, like teenager talk, you don't really learn everything as much as you
could.

She goes on to explain:

You say it three times, like like like like then yes (…) you're saying that you're
stupid.

Mia spends a lot of time at home with Julie, whom she sometimes calls my teacher. As

demonstrated numerous times throughout these interviews, Mia relies on Julie for help when she

falls behind in conversation and she feels she is the person she learns the most from.

I learn a lot from Julie because, I mean, I, I'm not afraid to seem stupid or
retarded (…) (or if) the answer is obvious. I don't care if she knows that, so
actually I learn a lot of things from you, Julie.
Sometimes I ask Julie or sometimes I just, just Google it or Google Translate. Or
I ask help, or (…) I just try like another way to say something.
TEENAGERS ABROAD 126

She explains that sometimes, she learns more than she would anticipate because one vocabulary

term leads to another. A few of the examples she gave include:

Like two weeks ago I ask you, how do you say this thing like the place where you
put the plates when you finished food? Sink, oh ok, now I know it.

She demonstrated her level of comfort asking Julie and the researcher questions anytime she

could not follow saying things like I'm confused or looking to Julie for pronunciation help.

However, this was not a one-way as Mia also taught a few words to Julie in the course of the

interviews.

Peers. In general, Mia finds it difficult to truly make American friends, beyond the level

of acquaintances. She feels lucky that the exchange students had already met when she arrived,

and that she was quickly able to tag along with Julie.

The, like the first week I was so confused like.. where I have to go? Where I have
to sit? And why there is so new people, I mean how can make friends? I, I, dunno,
like I’m not in the same room with the same people so you know, how I can make
friends?
With the exchange students we’re so close. (…)With the Americans, it’s kinda like
we don’t I don’t really have that much American friends. And I only started to
make like friends with them like December and January.

When asked about the experience playing basketball, she summarizes its contribution to her

experience in two parts:

That helped to not get fat.

(I learned) like basketball terms mostly and more like how American like speak in
the movies so like how they say something.
TEENAGERS ABROAD 127

Often, she notices that the novelty that an exchange student brings does not lead to a

serious interest on the part of her domestic peers. They are curious but sometimes, their curiosity

makes Mia feel patronized. They say things like:

Yea you’re so cute! (…) Friends say, I want an exchange student next year! Ok,
like we’re, like we’re a dog!

Mia says that most of the Americans she socializes with are sophomores.

Also because I’m friend with sophomore and they don’t have like a, a car.

Some of them offer the same type of suggestions her host family might and thus they help her

with English. One example she gave had to do with horoscope and zodiac signs. When the word

scorpion came up in an online conversation with a classmate, she thought he might have meant

Scorpio. She looked the word up in the dictionary and asked her friend whether he had meant the

zodiac sign. Because her friend did not know what she meant by zodiac, she used the dictionary

to learn and to teach him about it as well. She then learned new zodiac signs, and even taught

one to Julie during the interview.

So I just (…) write him, are you talking about the zodiac sign or something? He
said no, what's that? Oh okay I have to explain you. So then I like translate, eh
how say zodiac sign in English I say horoscope in English and other stuff with,
which sign he was and then I know, Leo. He was Capricorn.
It's Leo not lion.

Sometimes, she pays special attention to peers having a conversation because she knows

she can learn something from it.

You like, know the theme of a person going to tell and so you just listen the person
for know how, how like he's going to tell this.
TEENAGERS ABROAD 128

However, she clarifies that the times she pays attention to her own speaking versus another

person's speaking are separate.

Not at the same time, separate.

Mia notices that teenagers keep their linguistic choices simple.

Like teenagers. (They don’t) use this difficult word. They just like, simple.

She also thinks she has simply adopted the habits of her peers when she uses the word like as

often as she does.

Because I'm a teenager and here all the teenagers do it and people can
understand me. (...)

When asked how she thinks she learned to use it, she responds:

Well, listening people.

She thinks she might be able to unlearn it by thinking carefully before speaking, and by having

conversations with adults who do not use it in the same way. She adds:

Right now I don't even notice people saying like anymore.

Nevertheless, she does believe that the word like serves a useful purpose in conversation.

In addition to agreeing with Julie's analyses, she also finds it helpful for reporting speech. She

believes that her peers are a great resource, and she thinks international students should talk

to more people than each other.

(You have to) speak with random people, not strangers but (...) people in school

you see them like twice, you see them at lunch, or...

In general, she feels she has become more outgoing than she was in her home country, because
TEENAGERS ABROAD 129

I kinda have to. 'Cause if you're shy, you don't talk to anyone so it's ok, like I'm
not talking, I don't do anything for improve my English.

But of herself, she explains that her ability or willingness to talk to people is

different on different days in in different situations.

With a stranger like sometimes I really I, shut up a lot of time because I don’t
know how to say something, because I feel like ok it's better if I don't say
anything.
Sometimes I talk with everyone, sometimes I talk with no one, even Julie or my
friends. Like no one.

She compares herself to Irene, who, on the other hand, has no fear and talks to acquaintances and

strangers alike. Not forgetting her struggles in the first few weeks, Mia adds:

But I didn't understand anything at the beginning, so it's hard like to be outgoing
if you don't understand and you can't talk!

Sometimes, she wonders whether she would have met more people in a larger school. She

admits

But I also wanna like (meet) more people too (…).It would be scary at the
beginning.

Nevertheless, she feels that the wider variety of people and extra-curricular opportunities might

have been helpful.

Depends, because if you stay alone, you... If you just like say whatever, I'm here
for a year, let's have friends talk with everybody! Then... Maybe, (…) you (can)
have a lot of friends, different groups maybe for classes or sports or different.

She has also noticed that people are in general good-natured, which she finds to create a

comfortable atmosphere.
TEENAGERS ABROAD 130

They love like the school and the school spirit, homecoming week, also they are
super, super cheerful and people, like, they like, with always this big smile.

One thing she has not learned yet is how to use humor.
I have to make super funny face for like, be funny and… but yeah, I mean also
sarcasm also other thing like in (home country) you know how to be funny. Here
it's s difficult because of course you dunno. Also like the bad words.

Because of this inability to be funny in the same way, she feels somewhat constrained.

We can't be 100% us (...). I'm a person that jokes a lot and here I can't because I
dunno how.

She also agrees with Julie that this plays a part in adjusting to:

New people, new culture, new habits.

Classroom. Mia finds classes much easier in the United States than what she was used to,

despite the linguistic hurdles she faced. She normally finishes her homework in about twenty

minutes each day, and takes classes such as photography and cooking. In other classes, she says

that teachers help students a lot more than what she is used to in her home country, and are

overall more approachable.

They do (your work) and then you just have to write down.

And we don't really have a lot of homework.

But not all her classes are equally easy because of content and because of testing methods.

For me civics was harder because, yea, I didn't really know the language. But the
test, because it's just like crosswords, so that like for an American should be easy
for an American it's so easy but apparently it's not. I had (…) difficulty to adapt.

She compares the easier and the more difficult classes like this:
TEENAGERS ABROAD 131

In the hard classes, you have to know specific words and everything so it's harder.
The easy class, where there are not harder, you just talk with people so you are
still improve you English.

As explained earlier, Mia originally struggled to understand her teachers. As the program

progressed, she started to understand most of what happened in the classroom, but not all of this.

Although she does not reveal this explicitly, her reaction to Julie’s saying that she could

understand everything from the start clearly suggests it was not the case for her:

Lucky you!

However, like Julie, she does not like to raise her hand in the middle of class because

I feel like I don't wanna interrupt the lesson just for me that I can understand
something. I think it's not fair for the others maybe who are really paying
attention.

Another reason is that she does not want to draw patronizing attention from her classmates.

Instead, she gives the example of a teacher, Mr. Stevens:

I go to his desk and I ask and then we also like joke and so I just like, I feel
comfortable with him so I'm not afraid to say something wrong.

When she does not have a chance to speak with the teacher directly, she finds alternate ways to

answer her questions:

Maybe ask Julie or Google it when I'm at home.

Personality & risk taking. Risk-taking, for Mia, is not something that can always be

done. As explained earlier, she feels that, when her language skills were low, she was not in a

position to be outgoing and thereby to take risks. In addition, when she is having a bad day, she
TEENAGERS ABROAD 132

is more likely to let the conversation end at a misunderstanding. On a good day, however, she

will keep trying to maintain conversations.

Sometimes people can't understand what I'm saying, I just get depressed. (…) It
depends from my mood. If I'm like happy all day then ok, I'll say it again. But if
I'm like having a bad day, then oh what, what you say? Ok, nevermind, it's ok.
It depends on my mood. I have like two personalities. Sometimes I talk with
everyone, sometimes I talk with no one, even Julie or my friends like no one, I'm
just mad.

She will also be likely to use words whose meaning she is not completely sure about, or

when she is not quite sure whether the context is right (like for cuss words). In those cases, she

has to be prepared for her interlocutors' reactions, which may not be supportive or empathetic.

A risk is like ok, we are saying bad words that like, we grew up your parents say,
don't say bad words in (native language). You don't really get like how bad (it is)
so you just say it and people start to like, what, you just said that, really?! So that
is a risk.
Because actually I don't really realize how bad is a word.
So it's just another word that I learned here so why not using it?

Summary. Mia's English started out fairly low, but it has improved in all aspects and she

is proud of this achievement. However, she is also concerned that a few months back home, with

limited English exposure (except for her brother, who wants to practice with her), might send her

back to a lower level. She is determined to stay in touch with host family and friends, especially

Julie, through various online communication tools. She also intends to continue watching movies

and shows in English so as to keep hearing the language whenever possible.

TEENAGERS ABROAD 133

Secondary Participant Surveys

Parent survey results. Parents of all exchange students who participated in the study

received the survey via their personal e-mails. Two out of the four host families responded to the

brief online survey. This is a summary of the results (with direct quotes in italics):

 Host parents felt that students were linguistically prepared to live in their homes. One of

the parents claims we had fairly complex conversations early on.

 When asked about improvement, families provide very different answers:

o One suggests that three behaviors are necessary for increased proficiency:

willingness to engage in conversation despite mistakes, willingness to ask

questions and be corrected and use of dictionary for translation. The same host

parent explains that humility and high expectations in terms of English are also

helpful factors.

o The other host parents claim that their English has degraded due to the students'

use of youth slang. The same host parent believes that host parent intervention,

working with them on the right way to say things as well as homework,

particularly from English classes can positively influence their learning.

Teacher survey results. All school staff, teaching and non-teaching, received a copy of

the survey created by the researcher via the school principal. A total of eight high school staff,

seven teachers and one non-teaching staff, responded to the survey. Six of them worked with

students the same academic year but all worked with high school exchange students at one point

or another in their career. They responded to two questions regarding the students' linguistic

preparedness for participation in high school life, as well as the factors that determine their

success. This is the summary of findings.

TEENAGERS ABROAD 134

First Question: At school, how prepared have students been in terms of English proficiency?

Explain.

 Not all students come equally prepared.

 The majority are prepared for their coursework, by virtue of prior classes at home is a

comment that is reflected by six of the respondents. In addition, one comments that many

have a strong work ethic.

 Others have struggled because they were huge into partying and in jeopardy of failing

several classes.

 Some students come under-prepared linguistically, which can lead to their failure to be

held to any sort of a standard or to return home before the end of the program.

 Another comment that is repeated by many respondents is that too many students hang

out with other exchange students and don't spend much time with American students. One

of the respondents believes these students are pushed by their parents before they are

truly socially ready.

Second Question: In your experience, what have been some of the signs of a successful

experience for international exchange students (personality traits, habits, etc.)? Explain with

examples.

 Extroverts obviously do better is a comment that is expressed in five of the responses.

Social skills in a broader sense, seem to be a key sign of a successful experience. In line

with extroversion and social skills, involvement in extra-curricular activities right out of

the shoot is recognized as having a positive impact.

TEENAGERS ABROAD 135

 Academic commitment is also key, with many respondents suggesting that strong

language skills from the start, a solid background in the subject studied and a desire to

learn accompanied by a strong work ethic make a big difference in the classroom. One

goes as far as saying that they are usually the best students in class. I have had several

students in my regular sophomore English, they are continually better with better grades.

 Another respondent lists willingness to speak without fear of embarrassment as another

sign of success, and for another that includes speak(ing) up if there is difficulty with the

family with whom they live. Another suggests that he or she sees successful students'

overall confidence grow.

 One respondent explains,

the key is more in a desire for self-preservation and self-determination. With these
two characteristics, even more shy students are able to make sure their needs and
desires are taken care of in difficult situations. Students who are unable/unwilling
to do this falter.

Summary of Findings

As a transition into the analysis of the data in the following chapter, the researcher proposes the

following summary of data:

 All participants went through a similar process to determine their eligibility into the

exchange program.

 All primary participants had a positive overall experience, with at least satisfactory

academic achievement, a welcoming host family environment and some social

interactions outside of class and family.

 Once asked, all primary participants feel their language skills improved throughout their

immersion experience.
TEENAGERS ABROAD 136

 All participants found it difficult to identify their learning, both in terms of processes and

outcomes.

 Most primary participants identified that they learned idioms and vocabulary, linguistic

preferences, and some also identified grammar.

 At least three of the five primary participants suggested that they adjusted their

personalities throughout their experience, primarily by becoming more outgoing and

being more willing to talk to people they did not know much.

 All primary participants found that, overall, their classes in the U.S. were less

academically challenging that their classes in their European home countries.

 All primary participants found that learning in the classroom differs from learning in a

natural immersion environment in terms of both process and content.

 All primary participants find that not all social interactions were equal in what they could

teach them, and ranked teachers and host families as the groups they learned the most

from, and peers as the group they learn the least from.

 Only one of the primary participants identified another international exchange student as

a source of language learning, but interview data suggests at least some reciprocity in

teaching and learning.

 Three out of five participants found it at least somewhat difficult to make American

friends.

 All participants, primary and secondary, found that personality and personal efforts were

key elements to determine the success of one’s attempts to learn a language in

immersion.
TEENAGERS ABROAD 137

 Four of the five primary participants explained that they progressively shifted their focus

onto improving communication through fluency and less on accuracy.

 All participants, primary and secondary, suggest that language learning and a successful

exchange experience are deeply connected.

 Many participants suggested that language proficiency, social skills and interest in host

culture members upon arrival were key components for an exchange student’s success.

 All primary participants planned to maintain their language skills upon their return home

through maintained contact with host family and host country friends, as well as through

movies, games and books, and local opportunities for listening and speaking practice.

After collecting all the above data, the researcher analyzed it through the lens of the review

of literature in chapter 2. The last chapter of this research study discusses the conclusions drawn.
TEENAGERS ABROAD 138

Chapter 5: Analysis and Conclusion

This final chapter aims at providing answers to the research questions:

 How do international high school students perceive their own English language

acquisition?

 What do they think helps or hinders their learning in terms of community, program

structure, personality and other factors?

This chapter will be broken down into three major theme explorations. Each of these themes

was titled by the researcher to emphasize the cohesiveness of each, while subsequent text will go

into more details and create connections with academic literature as necessary. The first theme

describes the participants’ exploration of their own learning, some explained and some

unexplained. The second will explore the social aspect of the study abroad learning experience of

these participants through the lens of Communities Of Practice (COPs), and the last section will

investigate the participants’ efforts to adapt to a new context through cultural and identity

adjustment.

The exploration of themes will be followed by implications and limitations of the present

study, as well as recommended future studies aimed at further answering the research questions,

as well as others that arose during the research process.

Theme 1 - Learning: Explained and Unexplained

Most of the time, participants in this study did not notice that learning was happening. It

was difficult for them to identify instances of learning for this reason. Nevertheless, two different

types of learning become apparent in reviewing the data collected. Most obvious is the type

learning that participants can talk about relatively easily, generally characterized by formal or

formal-like settings and behaviors, and in which learning is clearly identified and noticed.
TEENAGERS ABROAD 139

Second, the participants were aware of a type of learning that took place in informal settings but

that was much more difficult to pinpoint because noticing was not apparent in that process. Both

types of learning are characterized in the following sections.

Learning that is explained: noticing in formal settings. When noticing happened, they

described learning that compared to the type of formal learning they described in their foreign

language learning experience, as in Wilkinson’s 2002 findings. In fact, Tanja says, I learn like a

lot because he teaches me a lot and he likes to teach. Participants were able to provide general

descriptions of what this type of learning looked like, as with Mia explaining sometimes I ask

Julie or sometimes I just, just Google it or Google Translate.

These participants sometimes gave specific examples, primarily of vocabulary, which

they acquired through more or less explicit assistance requests, recasts, or corrective feedback, as

in the exchange between Mia and Julie over horoscope vocabulary:

Mia: So I like, I just (…) wrote him, are you talking about the zodiac sign or

something? He said no, what's that? Oh okay I have to explain you. So then I like

translate how say zodiac sign in English I say horoscope (horoscope as

pronounced in first language, hesitantly)

Julie: horoscope (correcting her)

Mia: horoscope in English and other stuff with which sign he was and then I know

Leo. He was Capricorn. (…) I'm Sagittarius.

Researcher: Nice. How about you?

Julie: I’m a lion.

Mia: It's Leo, not lion.

Julie: Leo, Leo (practicing).

TEENAGERS ABROAD 140

Irene’s examples are particularly salient as well, including, sometimes someone will say my knee

hurts, and you don't know what knee means, and you're gonna ask and you're gonna learn it.

Participants also return to asking for assistance when they lack vocabulary to accomplish

specific tasks, whether within or outside of formal settings. Jefferson summarizes, what do you

call this, or how do you say this, or what's the name of that place or person (...). I ask (my host

parents) stuff that I'm like unsure of how to say, yea, and they answer.

Irene explains, at the middle of the year I realized that I had more problems

understanding at lunch what we are talking about with American people than here listening to

the teacher. In the cases described above, the participants played the well-rehearsed role of a

student: asking questions, sometimes raising their hands in class (Irene in particular) or asking

questions in one on one settings (all, with teachers and host parents in particular). They also

identified key teacher-like figures beyond those on their classrooms. Mia identified Julie, and all

identified their host families and teaching staff as playing that role. Irene explains, Maybe I have

more confidence to ask twice to my host parents or a teacher than a friend.

SILL strategies (Oxford & Burry-Stock, 1995) are found strictly in this type of learning.

Although no data collected allowed to compare how much students learned in these situations as

opposed to how much they learned through the peripheral learning opportunities afforded by

informal settings, the participants’ use of specific discourse markers suggests that it played a

greater role than would be assumed by the sheer number of reported examples of each.

Learning that is unexplained: absence of noticing in informal settings. All these

participants acknowledge that they cannot recall or account for most of their learning. Evidence

of peripheral learning is easily identified by the students’ use of like. It should also be noted that

the use of like, when compared to that found in academic literature about populations
TEENAGERS ABROAD 141

comparable to that of their peers (Dailey-O'Cain, 2000; Ferrara & Bell, 1995; Underhill, 1988),

appears to be appropriate. For example, they use focuser like in the following statements: also,

I’m friend with sophomore and they don’t have like a car (Mia) and, we had like a room and then

the teacher came to us mostly (Julie). Quotative like is used in instances such as Tanja’s, and

then somebody reads them and you’re like oh! or, Mia’s sometimes maybe with strangers it's like

ok I dunno how to say this.

It is possible, also, that Schmidt’s (1995) theory of noticed learning that is immediately

forgotten be applicable in this case. Jefferson, when asked about instances of asking for linguistic

assistance, explains, it’s usually nothing terribly important and once I have learned it, I

immediately forget I had to ask in the first place. So, although I have the knowledge that I asked

people about stuff like that, I really do not remember exactly what. The line, therefore, may be

more blurry than it first appears between formal and less formal learning, and between noticed

and peripheral learning processes.

Regardless of questions of noticing in learning, it is clear that learning, in the case of

these participants, was primarily a social event. The participants’ notable shift in focus from

English as a goal to English as a tool for social integration and social survival suggests just that.

Julie reminds us that, it’s not just all studying, it's also the social part (that is important).This

echoes Watson-Gegeo and Nielsen’s (2003) findings regarding language socialization and its

processes. As such, the majority of the learning both recalled as specific instances and noticed as

progress over time is oral, also in agreement with findings in the field of study abroad research

(Hernández, 2010; Segalowitz et al., 2004; Carson & Longhini, 2002). In this social context, the

role of COPs was of great importance to the participants’ experiences.

TEENAGERS ABROAD 142

Theme 2 - COPs

As suggested by Gallagher (2013), it can be assumed that increased opportunities to use

the second language outside of formal settings and positive acculturative outcomes go hand in

hand. Spenader’s (2011) remark that cultural adjustment and linguistic improvement are

inextricably related also supports findings in this study. Participants’ opportunities in this study

are tied to the various COPs with which they connected. As suggested by the participants, as a

group they experienced the full spectrum of levels of interaction and legitimacy with COPs

(Wenger, 1998; Davies, 2005; Wenger-Trayner, 2006). The examples below will provide

supporting evidence for each.

Host families represented a comfortable COP, but did not provide opportunities for in-

depth conversations in all cases, in partial agreement with Segalowitz et al.’s findings (2004).

One the one hand, Jefferson and Tanja found excellent conversation partners and teachers in

their host parents. Jefferson explains, so my host family (…) they’re cool. (…) And my, my host

dad he's like he's a prankster, he's a joker. He’s always messing with me and my host brother.

It’s like how my host brother says, like 95% of what he says is a lie and the other 5% is not true.

Tanja summarizes, with my host family I learn like a lot. ‘Cause you can talk with them like long

and good talks about everything. We talk about the world, about the life.

On the other hand, they also often found that linguistic needs for living at home were

otherwise relatively repetitive and quickly learned. Unless challenged through exchanges

unrelated to life at home, opportunities for learning were limited. Tanja explains, at home (with

host family) it's like, you learn most of it (quickly). Like words like rag or, I didn't know. You just

know and you say it every day. You don't really go out of what you say.
TEENAGERS ABROAD 143

However, they sometimes provided a way for participants to notice learning that

happened outside of this COP, such as Julie and Mia’s host family pointing out their use of like

and teaching them explicitly, it makes you sound stupid if you can't explain something without

using the word like (Julie). Nevertheless, as noted previously, host parents were the participants’

go-to linguistic informant/teacher figures.

The group of international students formed their own COP (with Jefferson as a less

central member), but they saw limited value in the opportunities it afforded them in terms of

second language acquisition. Even Julie’s teacher-like relationship with Mia is perceived as

potentially deficient. Julie claims, I’m just worried that I give you the wrong answer here. You

always listen to me. She adds, I would really like to have really good American friends because

then you really learn the way to speak like the Americans and get it correct. And you get

influenced by their pronunciation as well.

COPs made up primarily of domestic peers were the most sought-after community.

However, like Julie, many experienced difficulty in joining these COPs and remained on the

margins for various reasons. Tanja summarizes, you just feel like you have to watch out. If you go

too deep too fast, then they go away and so you just keep like, (…) hi, how are you? For the most

part, Tanja, Julie and Mia felt they remained very much on the margins of these COPs, both

because their domestic peers were not interested or not able to establish a friendship with them,

or because the international students had little interest in their peers. According to Julie, you

didn’t really get too like close with (the other basketball team members) ‘cause they’re kinda

childish.

One notable exception is that of Jefferson, thanks to his interest in video games, which

afforded him undeniable legitimacy. He explains, we play video games. I have like this friend of
TEENAGERS ABROAD 144

mine, I went to his house and his mom, we, we set ourselves near the computer, I got my laptop

and we started playing and like we stayed there for like five hours (...). It's a fun way of wasting

time.

Interestingly, comparisons can be drawn between this anecdote and Reinders and

Wattana’s 2014 findings, although WTC will be explored further in the following section.

Irene’s experience is also one that illustrates at least peripheral participation, although she was

somewhat uncomfortable discussing it in details. She explains briefly, I started dating a guy, (...)

I guess that was good to meet people and hang out after school.

These participants expanded more or less efforts in order to acquire legitimacy in these

COPs, which leads to some observations regarding their process of adaptation to the demands of

their new environment.

Theme 3 - Adapting to the Demands of a New Context

Participants in this study all experienced and described some level of cultural adaptation,

in line with Berry’s theory (1997). Affective acculturation is shown in the participants’ efforts to

lower inhibitions, behavioral adaptation is exemplified by Julie’s quote on personalities below,

and cognitive changes are demonstrated in linguistic improvement. In parallel to this shift, the

participants’ motivation became increasingly integrative while remaining instrumental (see

Norton Peirce, 1995It should also be noted that the social barriers these participants experienced

in the COPs certainly are in agreement with the literature (Norton Peirce, 1995; MacIntyre et al.,

1998; Wenger, 1998; Norton & Toohey, 2001).

As demonstrated both by the participants’ desire to join COPs as social opportunities, and

by the hypothesized amount of informal learning they experienced, they were challenged to

demonstrate sensible adjustment to their new context. Previous studies have suggested that study
TEENAGERS ABROAD 145

abroad students experience a decreased focus on accuracy, and a concurrent increased focus on

maintaining the flow of conversation (Segalowitz et. al, 2004; Segalowitz & Freed, 2004). AT

least in certain situations and at one point or another in their experiences, all the participants in

this study explained that they increasingly came to focusing on maintaining the flow of

conversation rather than on forming perfect sentences. According to Tanja, in the beginning I

was afraid to talk because I was afraid I would make mistakes all the time, and now I'm like, as

long as people know what I'm trying to say it's fine I can just talk. Irene goes further, you just

gotta be confident. This supports the theory that increased confidence leads to fewer perceived

communication breakdowns (Gallagher, 2013; Clément et al., 2003). ). This shift is also

reminiscent of the increased WTC experienced by Reinders and Wattana’s 2014 students as they

experimented with video games, likely focusing their attention on the goals set out by the game

rather than by the means by which they went about reaching the goals, i.e. English. It can also be

compared to Savicki et al.’s (2009) analysis in which an increase in practical thinking skills, as

opposed to analytic skills, helps increase fluency and confidence in the second language.

As demonstrated by the above quotes, the present research goes one step further and

suggests that this is done purposefully (if not intentionally) to increase access to COPs. Julie’s

explanation encapsulates this shift in terms of personality. She explains, you get like kinda two

personalities, like new one for when you're in America and another one when you're with your

friends and family. Maybe you're just influenced by the people here a lot. You try to blend in and

be like the Americans. It would be weird if I was exactly like I was in (home country) here.

This adaptation includes increased WTC, both through the increased confidence that

comes with practice (Clément et al., 2003) and through increasing desire to communicate with a

specific person or members of a specific group (MacIntyre et al., 1998). Most of the participants’
TEENAGERS ABROAD 146

examples are negative ones, whereby their low desire to speak with an individual or group

reflects that they do not seek connection with them. Mia describes, with a stranger like

sometimes I really I, shut up a lot of time because I don’t know how to say something, because I

feel like ok it's better if I don't say anything. Tanja also explains why she does not make

particular efforts with many of her peers, with some (American peers) it's just like hi and you

look so cute! Not really deep. I don't really care for that.

All the female participants explained that they often had off days, when they felt their

English was insufficient. They all quickly learned that those periods of low confidence

negatively impacted their opportunities to interact with many native speakers. Julie claims, here

you really have to go out there and be social and talk to everybody and just, like always have this

happy mood, you can't really have those off days like at the beginning because then people get

this like this bad impression of you

They also mostly felt that there's a lot of ups and downs but I think we're coming to a

point where it's mostly like good days because, you're always, we're speaking for almost six

months now (Julie), although Mia feels that her linguistic abilities have prevented her from

moving entirely past that stage. Instead, she feels particularly comfortable with a select number

of individuals: I ask and then we also like joke and so I just like, I feel comfortable with him so

I'm not afraid to say something wrong.

Even Jefferson, who did not speak of low confidence even at the beginning of his

program experience, explains that his English became smoother through increased willingness to

take risks and through efforts to speak to his classmates during class. He recalls, at home I was

really shy, and I wasn't really comfortable speaking in class, and teachers usually had to ask me
TEENAGERS ABROAD 147

to speak up (...). But now since, like, everyone kinda accepts me, like in school, and there's not

nearly as much pressure and so I'm more willing to take risks.

This clearly demonstrates how transformative this experience is for participants in this

study, far beyond mere linguistic improvement. It would be interesting to create a parallel study

of locals who come into contact with these international students to compare the level of

transformation they experience.

Implications of this Study

Interestingly, all the participants would recommend to students considering studying

abroad that they watch movies or TV series in the target language prior to their departure. In

addition, they plan to continue using these as tools, as well as social media, to maintain their

English skills upon completion of the program. It appears they believe it is one of the most

convenient tools to prepare for the transition to life abroad, with an emphasis on culturally and

socially appropriate language skills. This recommendation comes directly from the participants

and applies at various stages of program preparation and program support, including to foreign

language instructors in their home countries, exchange agencies in preparing students, and host

schools and families. Other recommendations to each of these parties are listed in the following

section.

Recommendations for foreign language instructors. Findings from this research

appear to validate the applicability of COPs in learning while studying abroad, of both the

cognitive and social elements of learning as proposed in language socialization, as well as of the

concept of WTC as the outcome of the convergence of a variety of influences, and of key

language learning strategies.

TEENAGERS ABROAD 148

However, these findings also challenge the idea that language learning strategies must be

processes and choices that are consciously noticed. The bulk of these participants’ learning

happened as peripheral learning. It is unclear whether the participants would benefit from

attention being drawn to their language learning processes. In addition, it is not clear whether

their having a better understanding of the processes of language learning in immersion would

have helped them have an even more fruitful experience in terms of language achievement.

Further research into this topic may provide data relevant for classroom purposes.

For classroom foreign language teachers, specifically, this research suggests that

socialization should be an integral part of classroom instruction. Indeed, the students were better

prepared to learn in ways that were familiar to them, i.e. in the classroom or using a dictionary,

whereas they may or may not have been as well prepared to take advantage of other forms of

learning. The data points toward a form of learning that would be directly embedded in the social

experience and where cognitive processes also take place within social interactions. This type of

learning is both analytic and practical, and integrates instrumental and integrative motivation.

Indeed it seems that most participants experienced difficulty in transitioning from primarily

analytic thinking as used in the classroom to primarily practical thinking, as used outside the

classroom. Practical thinking in language use and development can certainly be developed

through targeted exercises. Content-based, task-focused activities such as those studied by

Berwick (1993) may bring together learning that happened recently and previously, as well as

provide needed group conversation and other practical thinking practice opportunities. Indeed

these tasks may more closely reflect the construction and diffusion of knowledge that happens in

COPs than traditional syllabus-only tests.

TEENAGERS ABROAD 149

In addition, efforts to develop culturally-appropriate social skills would enhance study

abroad students’ ability to adapt to the expectations of their local peers and to integrate their

groups. In fact, based on these observations, social interaction should be at the center of their

pre-arrival instruction, as well as throughout their program participation.

Recommendations for exchange agencies. In spite of some difficulties, it is clear that

the participants enjoyed this experience tremendously, and were satisfied with their learning

outcomes. High school exchange programs do appear to be beneficial and life-transforming (as

they claim to be). Another implication of this study is that the high school exchange program as

it was experienced by these students is one that leads to satisfactory experience, including the

presence of other international high school exchange students, the presence of dedicated host

families with whom they can develop strong relationships, and the participation in extra-

curricular activities.

It would be advisable for exchange agencies to continue emphasizing the importance of

incorporating COPs for sojourners. In particular, programs should help students identify and

increase their fluency in a domain (like sports or video games). They could also specifically look

for host families with children the same age so as to help the exchange students integrate COPs

through an ally to obtain legitimacy could be highlighted prior to departure. Overall, high school

exchange students would benefit tremendously from learning the social skills that would allow

them to obtain legitimate peripheral participation into desirable COPs outside of the home.

Recommendations for schools hosting exchange students. In order to help students

integrate COPs more easily, schools could create peer support systems, designating domestic

peers who would be charged with helping their international buddy get involved and meet peers

in their school.
TEENAGERS ABROAD 150

The researcher also believes that the schools may also intentionally legitimize and

emphasize the exchange students’ particular academic domains of expertise. The participants in

this study felt they were mostly comfortable in the classes they took, yet many of them did not

feel they had legitimacy in asking questions during class. If these students’ knowledge and

expertise was clearly identified by the entire class, it is possible that some peers’ attitude would

change from curiosity because of novelty to a deeper interest. If done with consideration for the

students’ stage in cultural adjustment, language skills, confidence, and WTC, this may have the

additional effect of further increasing their language skills, confidence, and WTC and possibly

cultural adjustment (if this leads to LPP).

Recommendations for families hosting exchange students. Overall, host families are

the group that these participants felt they learned the most from, and with whom developed some

of the strongest relationships. They provide a safe space where exchange students can engage in

truly meaningful exchanges, feel validated, and hopefully gain skills that they can then use

elsewhere. The host families should continue and encourage the efforts made by other key

players listed above: providing a safe space for practicing language socialization, in particular on

their “bad days”, encouraging the students in their domains and practice, and whenever possible,

helping students find peers who can help them obtain LPP into COPs.

Limitations

As a primarily qualitative research study, the findings in this study are not meant to be

generalized to a broader population (Rossman & Rallis, 2010). In addition, despite the numerous

precautions taken by the researcher, the researcher’s prior experience as a high school exchange

student may have affected the data gathered in some way. In addition, data collection and

analysis was inevitably filtered through the researcher’s lens (Richards, 2003).
TEENAGERS ABROAD 151

Another limitation of this study comes from the data itself. Indeed, the participants found

it difficult to discuss the topic of their language learning experiences. This is both an interesting

and somewhat unexpected insight and, a potential hurdle in the quality and depth of the data the

researcher was able to gather. In addition, as a broad range of topics were brought up during data

gathering and analyzed subsequently, therefore potentially sacrificing some depth. For example,

the participants’ improvement in language skills had to be assumed, simply due to the format of

the study.

One of the primary limitations of this study is that the researcher was unable to imitate or

be directly compared with prior studies. The majority of studies used in the second chapter of

this study were studies of college or adult language learners, not of teenagers in full immersion

contexts. Although comparisons were found, the results of this study would be strengthened by

additional research focused on the same population. Consequently, the list of recommendations

for future studies is inevitably extensive.

Recommendations for Future Studies

Because such limited data is currently available, it is suggested that future studies explore this

population of language learners and their experience. Future research should focus on the

following directions:

 Measuring and comparing language learning outcomes in high school exchange students
and high school foreign language (classroom) students.

 Surveying the domestic students in contact with international high school exchange

students to try to understand what makes an international student a desirable member of

their COP or not.

TEENAGERS ABROAD 152

 More in-depth study of the noticing hypothesis as it pertains to the learning these high

school exchange students were not able to identify, specifically with the hypotheses of

subliminal perception and implicit memory (Schmidt, 1995).

 Observing and examining high school exchange students’ relationships with the various
COPs they are involved in, and investigating language learning opportunities for each.

 Comparing the use of discourse markers in high school exchange students’ interlanguage
and their domestic peers’ speech acts.

 Measuring WTC over time, within the framework provided by MacIntyre et al. (2007).

 Answering the questions: how dynamic is each layer of the WTC model? What

influences it most?

 Combining studies assessing language learning outcomes and all other criteria.
TEENAGERS ABROAD 153

References

Aguilar-Stewart, J. (2010). Using e-journals to assess students' language awareness and social

identity during study abroad. Foreign Language Annals, 43(1), 138-159.

doi:10.1111/j.1944-9720.2010.01064.x

Angulo, S. K. (2008). Identity change in students who study abroad . (2008-99240-035).

Retrieved from

https://books.google.com/books?id=UO5it0_UIRcC&pg=PA34&lpg=PA34&dq=%22Identi

ty+change+in+students+who+study+abroad%22&source=bl&ots=X-

qfVtnFbq&sig=8mAxSWReUuH6zIjGtNuEZBQbiiI&hl=en&sa=X&ei=BJFGVfLIBNfsoA

Tx2IDQAQ&ved=0CCsQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=%22Identity%20change%20in%20stud

ents%20who%20study%20abroad%22&f=false

Bateson, M. C. (1994). Peripheral visions: Learning along the way (1st Ed.). New York:

HarperCollins Publishers.

Baumgarte, R. (2014). Friends beyond borders: Cultural variations in close friendship (First

ed.). Charleston, SC: Create Space.

Baxter, L. A., & Babbie, E. R. (2003). Qualitative interviewing. The basis of communication

research (pp. 324-346) Wadsworth Publishing.

Benson, P., Barkhuizen, G., Bodycott, P., & Brown, J. (2012). Study abroad and the

development of second language identities. Applied Linguistics Review, 3(1), 173-193.

doi:10.1515/applirev-2012-0008

Berry, J. W. (1997). Immigration, acculturation, and adaptation. Applied Psychology: An

International Review, 46(1), 5-34. doi:10.1111/j.1464-0597.1997.tb01087.x

TEENAGERS ABROAD 154

Berwick, R. (1993). How second language learners respond to central and peripheral content-

based tasks. Retrieved from

http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=eric&AN=ED368190&site=ehost-

live

Birdsong, D. (2009). Introduction: Whys and why nots of the Critical Period Hypothesis. In D.

Birdsong (Ed.), Second Language Acquisition and the Critical Period Hypothesis (pp. 1-22)

Taylor & Francis e-Library.

Bochner, S., McLeod, B. M., & Lin, A. (1977). Friendship patterns of overseas students: A

functional model. International Journal of Psychology, 12(4), 277. Retrieved from

http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=5776348&site=ehost-live

Bohn, O., & Munro, M. J. (2007). Language experience in second language speech learning.

Amsterdam, Netherlands: Benjamins. Retrieved from

http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=mzh&AN=2007930848&site=ehost

-live

Brown, D. (2007). Principles of language learning and teaching (fifth edition ed.). White Plains,

NY: Pearson Education.

Brown, H. D. (2007). Styles and strategies<br />. Principles of language learning and teaching

(5th ed., pp. 141-142). White Plains, NY: Pearson Longman. Retrieved from

http://catdir.loc.gov/catdir/toc/ecip0519/2005027564.html; http://bvbr.bib-

bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&doc_number=016670537&line_number

=0001&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA

Brown, L., & Brown, J. (2009). Out of chaos, into A new identity. Existential Analysis: Journal

of the Society for Existential Analysis, 20(2), 341-361. Retrieved from

TEENAGERS ABROAD 155

http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=44007254&site=ehost-

live

Buchstaller, I. (2006). Diagnostics of age-graded linguistic behaviour: The case of the quotative

system. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 10(1), 3-30. Retrieved from

http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=mzh&AN=2006900982&site=ehost

-live

Buchstaller, I., & D'Arcy, A. (2009). Localized globalization: A multi-local, multivariate

investigation of quotative be like. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 13(3), 291-331.

doi:10.1111/j.1467-9841.2009.00412.x

Burns, A. (2010). Doing action research in English language teaching: A guide for practitioners.

(pp. 74-95). New York: Routledge.

Carson, J. G., & Longhini, A. (2002). Focusing on learning styles and strategies: A diary study in

an immersion setting. Language Learning, 52(2), 401. Retrieved from

http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ufh&AN=6836747&site=ehost-live

Clément, R. (1986). Second language proficiency and acculturation: An investigation of the

effects of language status and individual characteristics. Journal of Language and Social

Psychology, 5(4), 271-290. Retrieved from

http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=mzh&AN=1987017562&site=ehost

-live

Clément, R., Baker, S. C., & MacIntyre, P. D. (2003). Willingness to communicate in a second

language: The effects of context norms, and vitality. Journal of Language and Social

Psychology, 22(2), 190-209. doi:10.1177/0261927X03022002003

TEENAGERS ABROAD 156

Council on Standards for International Educational Travel. (n.d. a). About CSIET. Retrieved

12/30/2012, 2012, from http://www.csiet.org/about/who-we-are.html

Council on Standards for International Educational Travel. (n.d. b). U.S. government regulations

regarding international youth exchange. Retrieved 12/30/2012, 2012, from

http://www.csiet.org/publications-resources/federal-regulations/

Council on Standards for International Educational Travel. (n.d. c). I want to host an

international exchange student... Retrieved 12/30/2012, 2012, from

http://getstarted.csiet.org/?fuseaction=app.host

CSIET standards for long-term international educational travel programs, (2006).

Council on Standards for International Educational Travel. (2012). CSIET database of state and

local policies. ( No. 2012).

Dailey-O'Cain, J. (2000). The sociolinguistic distribution of and attitudes toward focuser like and

quotative like. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 4(1), 60-80. doi:10.1111/1467-9481.00103

Davies, B. (2005). Communities of Practice: Legitimacy not choice. Journal of Sociolinguistics,

9(4), 557-581. doi:10.1111/j.1360-6441.2005.00306.x

Dewey, D. P., Bown, J., Baker, W., Martinsen, R. A., Gold, C., & Eggett, D. (2014). Language

use in six study abroad programs: An exploratory analysis of possible predictors. Language

Learning, 64(1), 36-71. doi:10.1111/lang.12031

Eckert, P. (2000). Linguistic variation as social practice: The linguistic construction of identity

in Belten High (language in society). Malden, Massachusetts: Blackwell Publishers.

Ellwood, C., & Nakane, I. (2009). Privileging of speech in EAP and mainstream university

classrooms: A critical evaluation of participation. TESOL Quarterly, 43(2), 203-230.

Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/27785002

TEENAGERS ABROAD 157

EF Education First Ltd. (2013). EF EPI 2013 report. ( No. 3).www.ef.com/epi.

EF Education First Ltd. English Proficiency Index (EF EPI). Retrieved 07/19, 2013, from

http://www.ef.com/epi/about-epi/

EF Education First Ltd. (2012a). EF English proficiency index 2012. Retrieved 07/19, 2013,

from http://www.ef.com/__/~/media/efcom/epi/2012/full_reports/ef-epi-2012-report-master-

lr-2

EF Education First Ltd. (2012b). English proficiency index (EF EPI)<br />Europe - EF EPI

rankings. Retrieved 07/19, 2013, from http://www.ef.com/epi/europe/

European Commission, Directorate-General for Education and Culture. (2007). Key

competences for lifelong learning. European reference framework. Retrieved 07/19, 2013,

from http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/education_culture/publ/pdf/ll-learning/keycomp_en.pdf

Eurydice, & Eurostat. (2012). Key data on education in Europe 2012. Retrieved 07/19, 2013,

from http://eacea.ec.europa.eu/education/Eurydice/documents/key_data_series/134EN.pdf

Ferrara, K., & Bell, B. (1995). Sociolinguistic variation and discourse function of constructed

dialogue introducers: The case of be + like. American Speech, 70(3), 265-290. Retrieved

from http://www.jstor.org/stable/455900

Firth, A., & Wagner, J. (1997). On discourse, communication, and (some) fundamental concepts

in SLA research. Modern Language Journal, 81(3), 285. Retrieved from

http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ufh&AN=9710284140&site=ehost-

live

Flege, J. E., & Liu, S. (2001). The effect of experience on adults' acquisition of A second

language. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 23(4), 527-52. Retrieved from

TEENAGERS ABROAD 158

http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=eric&AN=EJ655752&site=ehost-

live

Flege, J. E., Yeni-Komshian, G., & Liu, S. (1999). Age constraints on second language

acquisition. Journal of Memory & Language, 41(1), 78-104. Retrieved from

http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=rzh&AN=2000032891&site=ehost-

live

Freeman, D. (1998). Collecting and analyzing data. Doing teacher research: From inquiry to

understanding (Heinle Cengage Learning ed., pp. 86-120)

Fuller, J. M. (2003). Use of the discourse marker "like" in interviews. Journal of

Sociolinguistics, 7(3), 365-377. Retrieved from

http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=eric&AN=EJ676330&site=ehost-

live

Gallagher, H. C. (2013). Willingness to communicate and cross-cultural adaptation: L2

communication and acculturative stress as transaction. Applied Linguistics, 34(1), 53-73.

Retrieved from

http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=eric&AN=EJ994963&site=ehost-

live; http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/applin/ams023

Geeraert, N., Demoulin, S., & Demes, K. A. (2014). Choose your (international) contacts wisely:

A multilevel analysis on the impact of intergroup contact while living abroad. International

Journal of Intercultural Relations, 38, 86-96. Retrieved from

http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=psyh&AN=2013-34306-

001&site=ehost-live
TEENAGERS ABROAD 159

Harris, M. (1976). History and significance of the Emic/Etic distinction. Annual Review of

Anthropology, 5, 329-350. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/2949316

Hernández, T. A. (2010). The relationship among motivation, interaction, and the development

of second language oral proficiency in a study-abroad context. The Modern Language

Journal, 94(4), 600-617. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/40959582

Holopainen, J., & Björkman, I. (2005). The personal characteristics of the successful expatriate:

A critical review of the literature and an empirical investigation. Personnel Review, 34(1),

37-50. Retrieved from

http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=psyh&AN=2005-08427-

003&site=ehost-live

Horwitz, E. K., Horwitz, M. B., & Cope, J. (1986). Foreign language classroom anxiety. Modern

Language Journal, 70(2), 125. Retrieved from

http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ufh&AN=7109347&site=ehost-live

Institute of International Education. (2013). International students: Leading places of origin.

Retrieved 4/21, 2014, from http://www.iie.org/Research-and-Publications/Open-

Doors/Data/International-Students/Leading-Places-of-Origin/2010-12

International Affairs Office, U.S. Department of Education. (2008). Visiting the United States:

Studying in the United States Retrieved from

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ous/international/usnei/us/edlite-students.html

Jiang, M., Green, R., Henley, T., & Masten, W. (2009). Acculturation in relation to the

acquisition of a second language. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development,

30(6), 481-492.
TEENAGERS ABROAD 160

Kinginger, C. (2008). Language learning in study abroad: Case studies of Americans in France.

The Modern Language Journal, 92(, Supplement. Monograph: Language Learning in Study

Abroad: Case Studies of Americans in France), i, 1-131. Retrieved from

http://www.jstor.org/stable/25173139

Krashen, S. D. (1976). Formal and informal linguistic environments in language acquisition and

language learning TESOL Quarterly. Retrieved from

http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=eric&AN=EJ143023&site=ehost-

live

Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation. New

York, NY US: Cambridge University Press. Retrieved from

http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=psyh&AN=1991-98963-

000&site=ehost-live

Lawrence, S. J., & U.S. Department of State. (2010). 22 CFR part 62. Exchange visitor

Program—Secondary school students: United States department of state. Final rule. ( No.

Vol. 75, No. 207).Federal Register. . (DEPARTMENT OF STATE 22 CFR Part 62 [Public

Notice: 7216] RIN 1400–AC56 Exchange Visitor Program—Secondary School Students

AGENCY: United States Department of State. ACTION: Final rule.)

Lee, JaeIn & Council on Standards for International Educational Travel. (2007). Hosting

motivation and satisfaction study. Retrieved 12/30/2012, 2012, from

http://www.csiet.org/publications-

resources/docs/Hosting_Motivation_and_Satisfaction_Study_-_Final.pdf

MacIntyre, P. D., Dornyei, Z., Clément, R., & Noels, K. A. (1998). Conceptualizing Willingness

to Communicate in a L2: A situational model of L2 confidence and affiliation. Modern

TEENAGERS ABROAD 161

Language Journal, 82(4), 545-62. Retrieved from

http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=eric&AN=EJ575507&site=ehost-

live

MacIntyre, P. (2007). Willingness to Communicate in the second language: Understanding the

decision to speak as a volitional process. The Modern Language Journal, 91(4), 564-576.

doi:10.1111/j.1540-4781.2007.00623.x

Muñoz, C. (2008). Symmetries and asymmetries of age effects in naturalistic and instructed L2

learning. Applied Linguistics, 29(4), 578-596. Retrieved from

http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=eric&AN=EJ820241&site=ehost-

live; http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/applin/amm056

Norton Peirce, B. (1995). Social identity, investment, and language learning. TESOL Quarterly,

29(1), 9-31. Retrieved from

http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=mzh&AN=1996097044&site=ehost

-live

Norton, B. (2000). Identity and language learning: Gender, ethnicity and educational change.

England: Pearson Education.

Norton, B., & Toohey, K. (2001). Changing perspectives on good language learners. TESOL

Quarterly, 35(2), pp. 307-322. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/3587650

Oxford, R. L., & Burry-Stock, J. (1995). Assessing the use of language learning strategies

worldwide with the ESL/EFL version of the strategy inventory for language learning

(SILL). System, 23(1), 1-23. Retrieved from

http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=eric&AN=EJ506791&site=ehost-

live
TEENAGERS ABROAD 162

Poehlman, L. (2012). 2011-2012 international youth exchange statistics. Semester and academic

year programs. Alexandria, VA: Council on Standards for International Educational Travel.

Ramsay, S., Jones, E., & Barker, M. (2007). Relationship between adjustment and support types:

Young and mature-aged local and international first year university students. Higher

Education, 54(2), pp. 247-265. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/29735109

Reinders, H., & Wattana, S. (2014). Can I say something? the effects of digital game play on

willingness to communicate. Language Learning & Technology, 18(2), 101-123. Retrieved

from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=psyh&AN=2014-23258-

006&site=ehost-live

Richards, K. (2003). Interviewing. Qualitative inquiry in TESOL (pp. 47-103). New York:

Palgrave Macmillan.

Rossman, G. B., & Rallis, S. F. (2012). Learning in the field: An introduction to qualitative

research (Third Edition ed.). USA: Sage Publications, Inc.

Rossman, G. B., & Rallis, S. F. (2012a). Chapter 10. analyzing and Interpreting data. Learning in

the field: An introduction to qualitative research (3rd ed., pp. 259-304). USA: Sage

Publications, Inc.

Rossman, G. B., & Rallis, S. F. (2012b). Conceptualizing and planning the research. Learning in

the field: An introduction to qualitative research (3rd ed., pp. 111-142). USA: Sage

Publications, Inc.

Rossman, G. B., & Rallis, S. F. (2012c). Gathering data in the field. Learning in the field: An

introduction to qualitative research (3rd ed., pp. 165-203). USA: Sage Publications, Inc.

Rossman, G. B., & Rallis, S. F. (2012d). The researcher as learner. Learning in the field: An

introduction to qualitative research (3rd ed., pp. 29-56). USA: Sage Publications, Inc.
TEENAGERS ABROAD 163

Rossman, G. B., & Rallis, S. F. (2012e). Qualitative research as learning. In S. F. Rallis (Ed.),

Learning in the field: An introduction to qualitative research (Third Edition ed., pp. 1-27).

USA: Sage Publications, Inc.

Savicki, V., Arrúe, C., & Binder, F. (2012). Language fluency and study abroad adaptation. The

Interdisciplinary Journal of Study Abroad, XXII, 119-141.

Schmidt, R. (1995). Consciousness and foreign language learning: A tutorial on attention and

awareness in learning. In R. Schmidt, Ed., Attention and awareness in foreign language

learning (pp. 1-63). Honolulu, HI: University of Hawai`i, National Foreign Language

Resource Center.

Schmidt, R. W., & Frota, S. N. (1986). Developing basic conversational ability in a second

language: A case study of an adult learner of Portuguese. In R. R. Day (Ed.), (pp. 237-326).

Rowley, MA: Newbury. Retrieved from

http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=mzh&AN=1986007193&site=ehost

-live

Segalowitz, N., Freed, B., Collentine, J., Lafford, B., Lazar, N., & Diaz-Campos, M. (2004). A

comparison of Spanish second language acquisition in two different learning contexts:

Study abroad and the domestic classroom. Frontiers: The Interdisciplinary Journal of Study

Abroad, 10, 1-18. Retrieved from

http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=eric&AN=EJ891446&site=ehost-

live; http://www.frontiersjournal.com/issues/vol10/vol10-01_Segalowitzetal.pdf

Spenader, Allison J. (2011). Language learning and acculturation: Lessons from high school and

gap-year exchange students. Foreign Language Annals, 44(2), 381-398. Retrieved from

http://search.proquest.com/docview/872087950?accountid=1557
TEENAGERS ABROAD 164

Tahriri, A., & Divsar, H. (2011). EFL learners' self-perceived strategy use across various

intelligence types: A case study. Journal of Pan-Pacific Association of Applied Linguistics,

15(1), 115-138. Retrieved from

http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=eric&AN=EJ939943&site=ehost-

live; http://www.paaljapan.org/conference/journals.html

Truscott, J. (1998). Noticing in second language acquisition: A critical review. Second Language

Research, 14(2), 103-135. Retrieved from

http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ufh&AN=7393357&site=ehost-live

United States Department of State Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs (Producer).

(2010). Secretary Clinton encourages Americans to host exchange students. [Video/DVD]

Retrieved from http://shar.es/U881S

U.S. Department of State.J-1 visa; J-1 visa basics; facts and figures. Retrieved 12/30/2012, 2012,

from http://j1visa.state.gov/basics/facts-and-figures/

U.S. Network for Education Information (USNEI).About the U.S. network for education

information (USNEI). Retrieved 12/30/2012, 2012, from

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ous/international/usnei/edlite-index.html

U.S. Department of State.J-1 visa: Programs: Secondary school student. Retrieved 12/30/2012,

2012, from http://j1visa.state.gov/programs/secondary-school-student

U.S. Department of State. (2012a). Designated sponsor list | participants | J-1 visa. Retrieved

10/1/2012, 2012, from http://j1visa.state.gov/participants/how-to-apply/sponsor-

search/?program=Secondary School Student

TEENAGERS ABROAD 165

U.S. Department of State. (2012b). Participant and sponsor totals | J-1 visa basics | J-1 visa.

Retrieved 10/1/2012, 2012, from http://j1visa.state.gov/basics/facts-and-figures/participant-

and-sponsor-totals/?program=Secondary School Student&state=&page=1

Underhill, R. (1988). Like is, like, focus. American Speech, 63(3), 234. Retrieved from

http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ufh&AN=9653185&site=ehost-live

Ward, C. A., Bochner, S., & Furnham, A. (2001). The psychology of culture shock (2nd ed.).

Hove England ; Philadelphia: Routledge.

Ward, C., & Rana-Deuba, A. (1999). Acculturation and adaptation revisited. Journal of Cross-

Cultural Psychology, 30(4), 422-442. Retrieved from

http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sih&AN=2054379&site=ehost-live

Watson-Gegeo, K. (2004). Mind, language, and epistemology: Toward a language socialization

paradigm for SLA. Modern Language Journal, 88(3), 331-350. Retrieved from

http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=eric&AN=EJ687054&site=ehost-

live; http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.0026-7902.2004.00233.x

Watson-Gegeo, K. A., & Nielsen, S. (2003). Language socialization in SLA. In C. Doughty, &

M. H. Long (Eds.), The handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 155-177). Malden,

MA: Blackwell Pub.

Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning and identity. New York, NY:

Cambridge University Press.

Wenger-Trayner, E. (2006). Intro to communities of practice. Wenger-Trayner. Retrieved

11/17/2013, 2013, from http://wenger-trayner.com/theory/

TEENAGERS ABROAD 166

Wharton, G. (2000). Language learning strategy use of bilingual foreign language learners in

Singapore. Language Learning, 50(2), 203. Retrieved from

http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ufh&AN=3274852&site=ehost-live

Wilkinson, S. (2002). The omnipresent classroom during summer study abroad: American

students in conversation with their French hosts. The Modern Language Journal, 86(2),

157-173. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/1192919

XYZ School District. (2012a). XYZ High School clubs/activities. Retrieved 1/1/2013, 2013,

from http://www.xyzschooldistrict.org/page/162

XYZ School District. (2012b). XYZ High School head coaches. Retrieved 1/1/2013, 2013, from

http://www.xyzschooldistrict.org/site/Default.aspx?PageID=168

XYZ School District. (2012c). XYZ High Sschool: XYZHS data. Retrieved 12/9/2012, 2012,

from http://www.xyzschooldistrict.org/page/169

Yashima, T., & Zenuk-Nishide, L. (2008). The impact of learning contexts on proficiency,

attitudes, and L2 communication: Creating an imagined international community. System:

An International Journal of Educational Technology and Applied Linguistics, 36(4), 566-

585. Retrieved from

http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=eric&AN=EJ819329&site=ehost-

live; http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2008.03.006

Yashima, T., Zenuk-Nishide, L., & Shimizu, K. (2004). The influence of attitudes and affect on

willingness to communicate and second language communication. Language Learning,

54(1), 119-152. Retrieved from

http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=eric&AN=EJ686948&site=ehost-

live; http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2004.00250.x
TEENAGERS ABROAD 167

Ying, Y., & Han, M. (2006). The contribution of personality, acculturative stressors, and social

affiliation to adjustment: A longitudinal study of Taiwanese students in the United States.

International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 30(5), 623-635. Retrieved from

http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=psyh&AN=2006-11673-

006&site=ehost-live

Zhou, Y., Jindal-Snape, D., Topping, K., & Todman, J. (2008). Theoretical models of culture

shock and adaptation in international students in higher education. Studies in Higher

Education, 33(1), 63-75. Retrieved from

http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=eric&AN=EJ782651&site=ehost-

live;

http://www.informaworld.com/openurl?genre=article&id=doi:10.1080/03075070701794833
TEENAGERS ABROAD 168

Appendix: Interview Questions and Journals

Interview #1

1. Tell me about yourself.

2. Tell me about your life back in your home country.

3. Tell me about your school in your home country.

4. Tell me about your family and friends in your home country.

5. What were some of your favorite things about life in your hometown?

6. Tell me about the process you went through to become an exchange student.

7. How would you describe your level in English before you arrived? And since then?

8. Tell me about your host family.

9. Tell me about the community in which you live.

10. Tell me about your current school.

Proficiency test and Journal

Following Interview #1:

 John Test (10-15 minutes)

 Prompts for written response (10-15 minutes)

o What is your name?

o Where are you from?

o What are your goals for this year? Why?

TEENAGERS ABROAD 169

Interview #2

1. Tell me a bit more about your English before you arrived. Describe different skills

(writing, reading, grammar, listening, speaking).

2. How has your English changed since you’ve been here?

3. What are some challenges about adapting to life here?

5. I asked you to e-mail me about a time your learned something in English. Tell me more

about this situation.

7. Since the last time I met with you, are things changing for you?

8. Tell me about your relationship with your host family.

9. Tell me about your relationship with teachers and staff at school.

10. Tell me about your relationship with your American classmates.

11. Tell me about your relationships with other international exchange students.

12. What is your favorite thing to do here?

Things to identify

Specific relationships within groups; areas of comfort and struggles; identity adjustments (e.g.

someone who is very social and become more comfortable with him- or herself, or someone who

is not very athletic joins a sports team to make friends).

Digital Journal

Participants each received a bullet point summary of the data collected about them. They were

asked two clarifying questions about specific aspects of the information they shared.
TEENAGERS ABROAD 170

Interview #3

1. Many of you said that classes were easy in comparison to what you were used to in Europe.

Can you give me examples of what was easy?

2. How do you think that has affected how much your English has improved? Why?

3. Many of you said that felt like an epiphany when you were able to understand lyrics in

songs, conversations between people or teachers you did not use to understand. Is that only

for listening? How does that compare to, say, speaking?

4. How does your willingness to take risks or be brave in English compare between now and

when you were in your home country?

5. Some teachers and host families think that social skills and an extroverted personality help

international students improve their English. Would you agree? Why or why not?

6. Many of you also talked about the difference between the way teenagers, teachers and other

people speak. What differences have you noticed? How do you compare to these different

groups of people?

7. I hear you say “like” a lot. Did you use that in your home country? How do you explain

learning that?

8. Is there something you wish you could change and that would have allowed you to learn

English better or faster?

9. How do you think your English may or may not change when you return home?

Things to identify:

Academics (1-2):Do they think they would have learned differently if classes were more

academically challenging? Has that changed over time (maybe they could only handle easy
TEENAGERS ABROAD 171

classes at the beginning and feel they would learn more from more challenging classes later on

but not from the start?)

Get personality traits (6): how “socially skilled” are they? How extroverted are they? Do they

have other qualities that they consider to be equally or more important?

Speech style (7): Do students identify with teenagers? If so, I want to ask one more time how

they learned to speak that way, since they tell me they learn more from host parents and teachers.

Changes (8): it could be programmatic, host families, how prepared they were at the beginning,

etc.

Return home (9): Will this shed some light as to what practice they see as valuable for learning.