Acculturation Theory Handout

I. Definition of Acculturation

● Acculturation is the process of becoming adapted to a new culture (Douglas,

1994)

● Acculturation is the process of cultural and psychological change that takes

place as a result of contact between two or more cultural groups and their
individual members (Berry, 2019). It follows migration and continues in
culturally plural societies among ethnocultural communities. Adaptation to
living in culture contact settings takes place over time. Occasionally it is
stressful, but often it results in some form of mutual accommodation.

● Acculturation has become one of the largest domains of research and

application in recent decades. Most features of the process and the outcomes
of acculturation and adaptation are now reasonably well understood,
permitting the development of policies and programs to promote successful
outcomes for all parties.

II. John H. Schumann

● He is a Professor Emeritus of Applied Linguistics and former chair of the

Department of Applied Linguistics and TESL at UCLA.

● His research includes language acquisition, the neurobiology of language,

the neurobiology of learning, and language evolution.

● He designed the Acculturation Model in 1978.

III. Origin of the Theory

● One famous longitudinal investigation was conducted by John H.

Schumann during the fall of 1973, a research project was undertaken to
make a ten month longitudinal study of the untutored acquisition of English
language by six native speakers of Spanish - two children, two adolescents
and two adults.

● Data collection involved the questionnaires, recording of both spontaneous

and experimentally elicited speech, observations on spontaneous
 conversation during ten months, and applied a quantitative treatment to the
data.

● Schumann proposed the Acculturation Model as a means of accounting for

the failure to progress of one of the six learners studied. Whereas the other
five manifested considerable development over the ten-month period of the
study, Alberto did not advance in most of the structural areas investigated,
for example, negatives, interrogatives, use of copula 'be', and verb
auxiliaries (Schumann, 1978b).

● Alberto's lack of development could not be satisfactorily explained by

either cognitive development, as he demonstrated normal intelligence, or
age, as many older learners achieve satisfactory levels of L2 proficiency.

● Schumann noticed that Alberto's speech manifested very similar properties

to those found in pidgins, leading Schumann to argue that similar processes
of pidginization were at work. Just as pidgins have been noted to develop in
contact situations that call for functionally restricted communication, so
learners like Alberto appear to fossilize because they too have a limited
need to communicate in the L2.

IV. Two Types of Acculturation

● There are two types of acculturation:

1. Learners are socially integrated with the TL group and develop

sufficient contacts with TL speakers to enable them to acquire the
target language.

2. Learners consciously or unconsciously desire to adopt the life style

and valuesof the TL group.

● Both types of acculturation are important to provoke acquisition of the TL.

V. Schumann’s Acculturation Theory

● According to this view, learners fail to progress beyond the early stages of
acquisition because they require the L2 for only the communicative
function of language (basic information exchange), and not for the
integrative function (social identification) or the expressive function (the
realization of personal attitudes).
 ● Some learners make rapid progress in learning a second language, while
others with the same initial ability and language instruction make little
progress in the same amount of time.

● Schumann hypothesized that this difference could be accounted for by

characteristics of the social and psychological distance learners placed
between themselves and the language they were learning.

● Schumann identified eight characteristics of social distance and four

characteristics of psychological distance.

VI. Two kinds of distance of 2LL from the TL culture.

A. Social Distance:

Cognitive and affective proximity of two cultures that come into contact within an
individual. Social distance concerns the extent to which individual learners
become members of the target-language group and, therefore, achieve contact with
them. Social distance determines how close an individual will come to becoming
like the target language group.

Factors that determine the level of social distance:

1. Social dominance: The social dominance considers the degree of equality

(subordination or domination) between the host and guest cultures. If the
second-language learning (2LL) group is politically, culturally, technically
or economically dominant to or subordinate to the target language (TL)
group, social contact between the two groups will tend not to be sufficient
for optimal target language acquisition. If they are nearly equal in status,
then there will be more contact between the two groups and thus,
acquisition of the target language will be enhanced.

2. Integration pattern or Assimilation, preservation, and adaptation: The

best condition for L2 acquisition is obtained when the 2LL group wants to
assimilate into the TL group. The second-best condition occurs when the
2LL group wants to adapt to the TL culture for intragroup interaction
without assimilating to it. The least favorable conditions obtain for
acquiring the L2 when the 2LL group wishes to remain separated
linguistically and culturally from the TL group.
 3. Enclosure: The more the 2LL groups share social institutions such as
schools, churches, workplaces, clubs, and others with the TL group, the
more favorable the conditions will be for L2 acquisition.

4. Cohesiveness: The guest community tends to stay as a cohesive group but

the smaller and less cohesive the 2LL group, the more likely the contact
with the TL group and the more favorable the conditions for L2 acquisition.

5. Size Factor: If the size of the learner’s group is large, it tends to facilitate
intragroup contact rather than inter-group contact.

6. Cultural Congruence: The more similar the culture of the two groups, the
more likely there will be social contact and thus language acquisition.

7. Attitude Factor: The more positive the views of the 2LL group toward the
TL group, the more favorable will be the conditions for L2.

8. Intended Length of Residence: The longer L2 learners plan to remain in

the L2 environment, the more likely it is that they will feel the necessity of
learning the TL.

B. Psychological Distance:

Psychological distance relates to how comfortable a learner is in relation to the

surrounding social affecting factors. Psychological distance disorientates a learner
in a way that may cause them to resist opportunities to take full advantage of the
social situation. Psychological distance concerns the extent to which individual
learners are comfortable with the learning task and constitutes, therefore, a
personal rather than a group dimension.

Factors that determine the level of psychological distance

1. Language shock: the degree to which speaking the new language makes
the learner feel foolish or comical.

2. Culture shock: the extent to which the learner feels disoriented and
uncomfortable with extended residence in a new culture.

3. Ego Permeability: the ability of the learner to accept a new identity

associated with the belonging to a new speech community
 4. Motivation: the degree and type of desire experienced by the learner to
acquire the L2. Motivation plays an important role in second language
acquisition. It provides the primary impetus to initiate learning the second
language and later the driving force to sustain the long and often tedious
learning process. Under the stimulation of various types of motivations,
students can embrace the linguistic patterns, which are reading, speaking,
listening, and writing. Lack of attention to motivation and attitude can lead
to inefficiencies in learning L2.

VII. Studies that Support the Theory

● Shapira (1978) has reported on the case of Zoila, a 25 year old Guatamalan
Spanish speaker, who evidenced very little development in the English
grammar over an 18 month observation period. Shapira suggests that
negative affect played a decisive role. Zoila did not come to the United
States out of choice, and Shapira hypothesizes that she had negative
feelings towards all things American and limited instrumental motivation to
learn just enough English to communicate.

● Kessler and Idar (1979) have compared the acquisition of English by a

Vietnamese mother and child. The lack of change in the mother's
acquisition level, even during a six-month period in which she was
interacting daily in English at work, was hypothesized to be the result of
affective variables operating negatively for the mother, who found
adjustment to her new way of life difficult and positively for the cnild, who
needed English for peer relationships.

● Lybeck (2002) tested Schumann’s acculturation theory via the operable

social exchange networks model, which has a postmodern view on using
English (De Costa, 2010), with English native speakers who acquired
Norwegian as their L2 and found that those who developed positive
network connections with native Norwegian speakers evidenced more
native-like Norwegian pronunciation than those who had greater difficulty
establishing such.

● Hansen (1995) measured German-born American immigrants’ acculturation

on the variables identified in Schumann’s acculturation model and found
that acculturation correlated with native-like phonation of successful
older-arrival age speakers that was assessed in both careful reading and
 spontaneous speech tasks. However, it should be stated that past research
has indicated that the optimal acculturation strategy varies greatly by
context with regard to the L2 acquisition practices and learning
circumstances (Vedder & Virta, 2005).

VIII. Criticisms of the Theory

● Although some studies favored the validity of the acculturation model, like
those stated above, Schumann’s theory received limited empirical support
and faced strong criticism.

● As a fundamental criticism against the significance of cultural factors in

SLA, Dash (as cited in Mondy, 2007) argues that cultural aspects are quite
often, not so readily identifiable, and that individuals may succeed in SLA
despite the social conditions.

● Moreover, according to Mondy (2007), there are some learners that will be
determined to succeed, irrespective of any of the conditions that present
themselves, and those learners that will not be successful, regardless of
favorable social circumstances. This implies that individual learner
differences, such as learning style and affective state are more
distinguishable as attributing factors to SLA, than the social conditions
(Mondy, 2007). Therefore, we should avoid making generalization about
the importance of cultural factors.

● Another problem with applying the acculturation model or in talking about

macro-level group-to-group relationships in general, may be that these
analyses take into account only one dimension of the many levels of
relationships experienced by learners. A more complete picture may be
achieved by including the micro-level effects of an individual’s personal
social network (Bluestone, 2009).

● Kelley (1982) and Stauble (1981) did not find any relationship between
acculturation and proficiency. Schumann did not include important personal
factors such as age, family separation, previous educational experiences, or
the traumatic experiences of the learner. These additional stress factors
determine how well a learner performs in a new social/school environment.

● Among other criticisms that the acculturation theory received was that
social factors are assumed to have a direct impact on SLA while they are
 more likely to have an indirect one (Ellis, 2008). Also, pidginization is a
group phenomenon, while language acquisition is an individual
phenomenon. Moreover, the acculturation model fails to explain how the
social factors influence the quality of contact the learners experience (Ellis,
2008). Therefore, some people caution against placing social factors so
clearly in the forefront as a separate entity.

● According to Freeman & Long (1991), Schumann did not specify the
combinations and levels of social and psychological factors to predict
learner’s language outcome.

● Acculturation model also does not explain how social and psychological
factors affect the rate of acquisition. This model does not give statement for
the change of the social or psychological distance over time.

● Does not explain learners current social and psychological distance and
how its collarets to the learner’s proficiency, while learning a L2

● Does not show how social and psychological factors vary from individual
to individual.

IX. Strengths of the Theory

● There have been many factors assumed to limit and question the
applicability and validity of the acculturation model; yet aspects of this
model may have significant educational implications for SLA. That is why
Stern (1983) believes this model has given a “better insight into language
learning, designing research studies, and diagnoses individual patterns of
language learning.”

● According to Spolsky (1988), successful L2 teaching requires not only the

ability to impart grammatical knowledge but also sensitivity to the social
realities faced by students. Therefore, integrating cultural instruction in
order to increase learners’ cultural tolerance, cultural literacy, and native
culture appreciation not only becomes apriority for L2 instructors but also
for syllabus designers and policymakers. Adopting such a context-sensitive
perspective might generate higher levels of willingness and motivation
among L2 learners. It is also suggested not to consider teachers and
language instruction a substitute for a naturalistic context where personal
experience would facilitate cultural literacy (Barjasteh & Vaseghi, 2012)
X. Classroom Strategies Implementing the Theory

Educators can apply Schumann's Acculturation Model to enhance their pedagogy

in teaching a second language. Here are some practical strategies that educators
can implement based on Schumann's Acculturation Model:

1. Build a Supportive Learning Community: Foster a sense of community

and belonging among students. Incorporate icebreaker activities,
team-building exercises, and collaborative projects. Create a positive and
inclusive classroom environment that encourages students to share their
cultural backgrounds.
2. Integrate Culture into Language Teaching: Connect language learning
with cultural understanding. Infuse cultural elements into lessons, including
literature, films, music, and traditions. Discuss cultural nuances and
variations in communication styles to prepare students for real-world
language use.
3. Address Psychological Factors: Support learners' motivation, confidence,
and well-being. Provide regular positive reinforcement and constructive
feedback. Create a safe space for students to express themselves without
fear of judgment. Implement goal-setting activities and encourage a growth
mindset to build confidence and motivation.
4. Cultivate Language Learning Motivation: Connect language learning to
students' personal and professional goals. Engage students by showing the
practical applications of language skills in real-life scenarios. Highlight the
benefits of language proficiency for personal growth and career
advancement. Connect language learning to students' interests and
aspirations.
5. Create Opportunities for Interaction: Facilitate social interactions both
inside and outside the classroom. Organize language exchange programs,
 conversation partners, or language clubs. Encourage students to engage in
authentic language use by participating in community events, online
forums, or cultural gatherings.
6. Reflect and Adapt: Regularly assess the effectiveness of teaching methods
and make adjustments as needed. Collect feedback from students and
reflect on the success of different strategies. Be willing to adapt teaching
methods based on the evolving needs and dynamics of the classroom.

By incorporating these strategies, educators can create a more dynamic and

effective language learning environment, aligning with Schumann's Acculturation
Model and promoting a holistic approach to second language acquisition.

XI. Assessment

A. Multiple Choice

1. What is the term for the process of cultural and psychological change that
takes place as a result of contact between two or more cultural groups and
their individual members?
a. Assimilation
b. Acculturation
c. Integration
d. Separation

2. Who stated that "Acculturation is the process of becoming adapted to a new

culture"?
a. John W. Berry
b. Noam Chomsky
c. Douglas Brown
d. Stephen Krashen

3. Who is a Professor Emeritus of Applied Linguistics known for conducting a

famous longitudinal investigation during fall 1973?
a. Stephen Krashen
b. John Schumann
 c. Michael Long
d. Diane Larsen-Freeman

4. What does the concept of "Social Distance" in language acquisition concern?

a. The physical space between learners
b. The cultural similarities between learners
c. The extent to which individual learners become members of the
target-language group
d. The linguistic differences between learners

5. Which term relates to how comfortable a learner is in relation to the

surrounding social affecting factors?
a. Cultural Consonance
b. Social Distance
c. Psychological Distance
d. Assimilation

B. True or False

1. Psychological distance relates to how comfortable a learner is in relation to

the surrounding social affecting factors.

2. A good language learning situation is when both groups display positive

attitudes towards each other.

3. Language shock is when the L2 learners feel anxious and disoriented upon
entering a new culture.

4. Cultural Congruence says that the more similar the culture of the two groups,
the more likely there will be social contact and thus language acquisition.

5. The hypothesis in this topic states that the greater the social distance between
two cultures, the greater the difficulty the learner will have in learning the
second language.
 C. Matching Type

1. The L2 group can be

politically, culturally, A. Enclosure
technically, or economically
superior
B. Cultural congruence
2. The L2 group may assimilate
or seek to preserve its
lifestyle and values, or
acculturate C. Social dominance

3. The L2 group may share the

same social facilities or may D. Cohesiveness
have different social facilities.

4. The L2 group is characterized

by intra-group contacts or E. Integration pattern
inter-group contacts.

5. The culture of the L2

group may be similar
or different to that of
the TL group.

XII. Answer Key

A. Multiple Choice
1. B
2. C
3. B
4. C
5. C
 B. True or False
1. TRUE
2. TRUE
3. FALSE
4. TRUE
5. TRUE

C. Matching Type
1. C
2. E
3. A
4. D
5. B

XIII. References:

● Berry, J. W. (2019). Acculturation: A Personal Journey across Cultures.

Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-1-108-73109-6
● Brown, H. Douglas (1994). Principles of Language Learning and Teaching.
New Jersey: Prentice Hall Regents. pp. 169–70. ISBN 978-0-13-191966-2.
● Ellis, Rod (1994). The Study of Second Language Acquisition. Oxford:
Oxford University Press. p. 230. ISBN 978-0-19-437189-6.
● Smith, R. (1983). The Strengths and Limitations of Acquisition: A case
study of an untutored language learner. Working Papers (1982-2000).
http://hdl.handle.net/10125/38650
● Zaker, A. (2016). THE ACCULTURATION MODEL OF SECOND
LANGUAGE ACQUISITION: INSPECTING WEAKNESSES AND
STRENGTHS. Indonesian EFL Journal, 2.
https://doi.org/10.25134/ieflj.v2i2.640