Difficulties in Learning English As a Second Or Foreign Language

participant’s language learning aptitude and the possibility of the existence of 
language learning disability were unavailable at the time of the study as the 
participant had not been tested or screened for these. However, it is important to 
note, in light of the importance of motivation, and prior to further discussion about 
learning disability, that studies have found that large numbers of students without 
learning disabilities (LD) exhibited FL learning difficulties and that attitude and 
motivation problems were not the cause of FL learning problems but were the result 
of such problems (Ganschow & Sparks, 1995, 1996; Ganschow et al., 1994; 
Ganschow et al., 1991; Sparks & Ganschow, 1993a, 1993b, 1993c, 1996; Ganschow, 
Sparks, Javorsky, Pohlman, & Patton, 1992a, 1992b; all cited in Ganschow et al.). 
Language Learning Disability 
This researcher was not qualified to make any determination about the 
possibility of the existence of learning disability in the learner and had no access to 
the tools used for the screening and diagnosis of them and attempts to pursue 
screening for this participant locally at the university, and community college levels 
were unsuccessful. Furthermore, the mystery around the existence of and the 
diagnosis of language learning disability creates doubt for this researcher.

---

73 
The original suspicion of the possibility of the existence of a learning 
disability such as dyslexia arose from the researcher’s observation of a modest 
number of documents from the participant’s English class homework and spelling 
practice sheets and other discreet observations regarding the participant’s recording of 
numbers. The leap from such observations to a suspicion of learning disability was 
possibly too great, and was based on mostly superficial appearances, and as such, was 
an amateurish, unskilled, and perhaps ill advised suggestion.
Since, for example, “d” and “b” both exist in English, the learner’s mistaken 
use of one in place of the other does not necessarily constitute a transposed writing of 
a letter, and the same is true for “p” and “q” as these are the kinds of mistakes that 
were noticeable in some of the learner’s earlier work. However, these kinds of 
mistakes are more and more rare in the learner’s most recent work, an indication that 
increasing familiarity with the alphabet, combined with closer copying of English 
texts for writing practice and attention to detail, has eliminated the majority of those 
simple spelling mistakes.
While it would have been useful to the study to have had the learner screened 
for language learning disability and tested for general language learning aptitude, 
such resources and instruments were simply not available to the researcher during the 
course of this study, neither in English nor in the learner’s native language. Also, 
there are other important considerations around diagnosis. First, it is generally 
acknowledged that there is no effective and consistent instrument for the diagnosis of 
LLD (Shank, 2001; Schwarz, 2003). Second, diagnostics are not suitable for adult 
ESL learners, in part, because they are normed on younger, native English speakers.

---

74 
Third, screeners can not measure a diagnosed English disability against many other 
languages and, apparently, this is doubly true when the learner’s first language is 
Chinese, and the screening results cannot be verified in the native language. This 
seems to contradict the Schwarz and Terrill indication that LD can often be covered 
up and compensated for in an individual’s native language, but surface in the learning 
and practice of a second language. It seems to this researcher that the diagnosis of 
language learning disability is a mysterious, restrictive, and politically charged 
endeavor.
Schwarz and Terrill (2000) emphasized, as did Shank (2001), that the benefits 
of identifying adults as LD should be weighed against the potential stigma of the 
label, and they urged the consideration of other reasons for limited progress in 
English. Ganschow et al. (1998) cautioned that those interested in screening a 
learner should first establish whether a student has a documented history of difficulty 
with native language learning a verifiable record of failure in, or inordinate struggle 
with native language learning, before pursuing the possibility of learning disability.
Since this researcher is not able to establish any of those precursors, screening is not 
only unavailable to this learner, but possibly can not be justified for this learner.
In lieu of standard assessments, Schwarz and Terrill (2000) offered alternative 
evaluation methods that included learner interviews and portfolio collection which 
might provide a more complete picture of a learner’s performance over time, a more 
useful tool in following a learner’s progress, however modest.
However, even the existence of LLD does not preclude a learner from success 
in FL learning. Downey and Snyder (2000) found that students with LLD could: (a) 

---

75 
acquire FL skills, (b) achieve at levels that match their peers in regular FL classes, 
and (c) satisfy university FL requirements by participation in the modified FL classes 
with proper instruction and accommodation. The researchers established that most 
students with LLD could acquire FL proficiency in classes modified to meet their 
needs. They found that the use of accommodations, such as extensive pretest 
preparation, extra time for tests and quizzes, a smaller amount of content, smaller 
class sizes and a low pressure, safe classroom environment helped students perform 
better and develop greater confidence.
Downey and Snyder (2000) suggested that the most important aspect of 
instruction was the “explicit and direct teaching of phonology and orthography of the 
new sound-symbol system” (p. 90). Schwarz and Terrill suggested a number 
instructional methods and materials gleaned from previous research (Almanza, 
Singleton, & Terrill, 1996; Baca & Cervantes, 1991; Ganschow & Sparks, 1993; 
Riviere, 1996, as cited in Schwarz & Terrill, 2000) that rely on structured and 
predictable activities and reinforce previous teaching and incorporate a multisensory 
approach. The Ganschow et al. (1998) findings supported the conclusion that direct 
teaching of the phonological/orthographic and grammatical rule system is essential to 
help poor FL learners. 
As cited in Ganschow et al. (1998), Pimsleur (1968) and Pimsleur, Sundland, 
and McIntyre (1964) suggested that different levels of ability to process sounds and 
sound/symbol units was often the cause of differences in FL learning that could not 
be attributed to low motivation or intelligence. Dinklage (1971, as cited in Ganschow 
et al.) concluded that otherwise high achieving students at Harvard University who 

---

76 
failed FL requirements, showed learning weaknesses in: (a) reading and spelling, (b) 
letter/symbol reversals, (c) sound and syllable discrimination in the FL, and (d) in 
verbal memory.
Research has shown that learners with difficulties and/or disabilities can learn 
foreign language and there is consensus, even among researchers across viewpoints 
for and against LD diagnosis, that the most important teachable tool is the 
phonological/orthographic, sound/symbol rule system of the target language, and that 
this becomes more critical for a learner whose first language bears no similarity to the 
target language and the first literacy bears no similarity to the target literacy. Without 
explicit teaching of the English letter, sound, spelling, and pronunciation rules, the 
learner was doomed to make limited progress in English, regardless of the existence 
or nonexistence of diagnosable learning disability. 
It is a recurring theme for this learner that she craves a return to basics. She 
instinctively knows that something important is lacking at the foundational level of 
her language learning experience. 
Adult Learning Themes 
Given the first opportunity, the learner described her ideal learning situation.
The environment is low pressured and comfortable, the material is interesting, there is 
a sense of community, and above all, the instructor is patient. None of this is 
revolutionary. The absence of these played a notable role in this learner’s limited 
language improvement. In addition, this learner experienced, first hand, other themes 
common to adult learning, such as a wide variety of barriers to participation (Merriam 

---

77 
& Caffarella, 1999), including and especially, questionable practicality and usefulness 
of instruction content in ESL, and the marginality experienced by limited English-
proficient learners and of ESL instruction programs in general (Orem, 2000). 
According to Crandall (1993, as cited in Orem, 2000), the adult ESL industry 
in the U.S. suffers from significant marginalization, both for instructors who tend to 
be untrained, part-time employees without benefits or hope for advancement and the 
limited English-proficient learners who are “generally, the most marginal members of 
our adult population” (p. 440). Often, high turnover and low morale are coincidental 
to a lower quality of teaching since there is little structure in place to support the 
needs of teachers, especially with regard to teacher development and learner 
advocacy (Crandall, 1993; Chisman, Wrigley, & Ewen, 1993; Pennington, 1992; 
Orem 1989, all cited in Orem).
Another adult learning theme that bears mention is cognitive ability. The learner 
mentioned several times the apparent poor memory that seemed to inhibit her ability to 
learn English. While adults require a slower instructional pace than children (Schaie & 
Willis, 1978, as cited in Lueers, 1983), this is because of a slowing in information 
processing capability which is likely related to depth of processing. In a 25 year 
longitudinal study, Schaie (1982, as cited in Lueers, 1983) established that there was no 
significant decline in performance over time of a number of different mental abilities. If 
this learner experiences genuine memory or retention problems specific to language, it 
could be due to a diagnosable deficit or some physiological variable that might be 
manageable via memory or mental exercises, such as learning activities themselves. This 
remains a question for follow-up study or evaluation by someone trained in those areas. 

---

78 
Self-Expression 
There is great significance to the researcher’s question and the participant’s one-
word answer about whether the learner had taken an English first name, such as is taken 
by so many learners of English as a second language (ESL). Some learners benefit by, 
and enjoy taking on a new persona as they step onto the language learning and practice 
stage (Horwitz, 1986; Horwitz, Horwitz & Cope, as cited in von Worde, 1998). What 
was significant about the learner’s answer to this question was its comment about 
identity. She answered the question briefly and decidedly, “No.” This learner had a 
name she liked just fine and had no desire to take on a different identity. The learner’s 
strong sense of identity was both a source of personal strength and a limiting factor in 
her learning experience.
Crookall and Oxford (1991, as cited in von Worde, 1998) reported that 
misunderstandings relating to others and representing one’s true self can lead to 
withdrawal and increased alienation, using the terms, “reduced personality” and “culture 
shock” (p. 23). Such social marginalization and associated lack of access to natural 
language practice opportunities might be particularly frustrating for a woman (Burton, 
1993; Nyikos, 1990; Hart & Cumming, 1997; all cited in Wang, 1999) because women, 
more so than men, place a very high value on interpersonal relationships, which are 
crucial to many women’s self-concept (Caffarella & Olson, 1993, as cited in Tenant & 
Pogson, 1995). The learner had difficulty being herself while practicing English at a 
level from which it was nearly impossible for her to express herself, for too long. She 
missed out on a crucial aspect of English learning and, at the same time, missed a part of 

---

79 
herself. As Peirce (1995, as cited in Wang) pointed out, the successful learner needs 
more than what is inside her; she needs the willing participation of another person.
Since these combined frustrations can compound the effects and causes of the 
perceived failure to progress, Ching’s potential sense of personal emptiness and failure 
might have led to shame and embarrassment and further inhibited the practical and 
natural acquisition of the new language. She needed the opportunity to share 
understandable input and feedback (Gass, 1997; Long, 1996; Pica, 1994; all cited in 
Moss & Ross-Feldman, 2003) and the conversational interaction that “facilitates 
acquisition because it connects input; internal learner capacities, particularly selective 
attention; and output in productive ways” (p. 2). In Ching’s case, there may have been a 
lack of comprehensible input for her to work with or she had possible retention problems 
in using whatever English she might have picked up. She was then unable to build on 
any significant language learning and felt discouraged over not being able to be herself,