ISSN 2953-6367  
http://revistainvestigo.com  
Octubre 2026  
Vol. 7 No. 21, PP. 64-79  
https://doi.org/10.56519/cst2dj80  
ESTRATEGIAS SOCIOAFECTIVAS PARA LA ENSEÑANZA DEL  
INGLÉS A ADULTOS MAYORES: ESTUDIO DIAGNÓSTICO DE  
MÉTODOS MIXTOS EN LA COMUNIDAD RURAL DE SIDCAY,  
ECUADOR  
SOCIO-AFFECTIVE STRATEGIES FOR TEACHING ENGLISH TO  
OLDER ADULTS: A MIXED-METHODS DIAGNOSTIC STUDY IN  
THE RURAL COMMUNITY OF SIDCAY, ECUADOR  
Verónica Margoth Parra Illescas1, Martha Viveros Almeida2  
{veronica.parra@upec.edu.ec1, martha.viveros@upec.edu.ec2}  
Fecha de recepción: 07/07/2026  
/ Fecha de aceptación: 21/08/2026  
/ Fecha de publicación: 14/10/2026  
RESUMEN: Los adultos mayores rurales de América Latina permanecen ausentes de la oferta  
y la investigación en enseñanza del inglés. Este estudio diagnosticó las condiciones  
socioafectivas relacionadas con el aprendizaje del inglés en adultos mayores de Sidcay,  
comunidad rural de Cuenca, Ecuador. Se empleó un diseño mixto concurrente con predominio  
cuantitativo y un componente cualitativo breve y contextual. Veinticinco adultos de 60 años o  
más respondieron oralmente un cuestionario Likert de 24 ítems organizado a priori en cuatro  
dimensiones; cinco integrantes de una muestra cualitativa separada participaron en entrevistas  
semiestructuradas de 2 a 7 minutos. La consistencia interna por dimensión osciló entre 0,749 y  
0,798. Las respuestas mostraron mayor acuerdo con motivación y valor percibido (M = 3,95; DE  
= 0,66), preferencias socio-relacionales (M = 3,81; DE = 0,74) y necesidades de inglés oral y  
funcional (M = 3,73; DE = 0,66), y menor acuerdo con barreras afectivas redactadas en sentido  
negativo (M = 2,86; DE = 0,79). Las 24 medias por ítem se situaron entre 2,64 y 4,08, y 16 ítems  
presentaron desviaciones estándar iguales o superiores a 1,00, lo que indica desacuerdo interno  
considerable. Las entrevistas aportaron cuatro categorías tópicas recurrentes sobre conexión y  
actividad, preparación emocional, apoyo docente y usos orales cotidianos, que complementan,  
pero no validan los patrones de la encuesta. Dado que los ítems positivos coinciden con tres  
dimensiones, los negativos solo con barreras y la administración fue oral, el sesgo de  
aquiescencia y la presencia de la entrevistadora no pueden separarse de las diferencias  
sustantivas. Los resultados son, por tanto, descriptivos y provisionales. El estudio aporta un  
instrumento documentado, un protocolo replicable de administración oral para adultos  
1Universidad Politécnica Estatal del Carchi Posgrado Ecuador, ORCID: https://orcid.org/0009-0009-9978-5517; +59399 970 2572.  
2Profesor Ocasional en la Universidad Politécnica Estatal del Carchi, Ecuador, ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2441-6954;  
+593979289520.  
64  
Revista Científica Multidisciplinaria InvestiGo  
Riobamba – Ecuador  
Cel: +593 97 911 9620  
revisinvestigo@gmail.com  
ESTRATEGIAS SOCIOAFECTIVAS PARA LA ENSEÑANZA DEL INGLÉS A ADULTOS MAYORES: ESTUDIO DIAGNÓSTICO DE MÉTODOS  
MIXTOS EN LA COMUNIDAD RURAL DE SIDCAY, ECUADOR  
mayores con alfabetización heterogénea y un primer perfil descriptivo de esta población, junto  
con un marco de ocho estrategias socioafectivas propuesto para evaluación futura.  
Palabras clave: estrategias socioafectivas; adultos mayores; inglés como lengua extranjera;  
educación rural; aprendizaje a lo largo de la vida; Ecuador  
ABSTRACT: Older adults in rural Latin America remain largely absent from English language  
teaching provision and research. This study diagnosed socio-affective conditions related to  
English learning among older adults in Sidcay, a rural community in Cuenca, Ecuador. A  
concurrent, quantitatively weighted mixed-methods design included a brief contextual  
qualitative component. Twenty-five adults aged 60 or over answered an orally administered  
24-item Likert questionnaire organized a priori into four dimensions; five members of a  
separate qualitative sample completed semi-structured interviews lasting 2-7 minutes.  
Dimension-specific internal consistency ranged from 0.749 to 0.798. Responses showed greater  
agreement with motivation and perceived value (M = 3.95, SD = 0.66), social-relational  
preferences (M = 3.81, SD = 0.74), and oral, functional learning needs (M = 3.73, SD = 0.66), and  
less agreement with negatively worded affective barriers (M = 2.86, SD = 0.79). All 24 item  
means fell between 2.64 and 4.08, and 16 items showed standard deviations at or above 1.00,  
indicating substantial within-group disagreement. The interviews supplied four recurring  
topical categories concerning connection and activity, emotional readiness, teacher support,  
and everyday oral uses; these complement, but do not validate, the survey patterns. Because  
positive wording coincided with three dimensions, negative wording occurred only in the  
barrier dimension, and administration was oral, acquiescent responding and interviewer  
presence cannot be separated from substantive differences. The findings are therefore  
descriptive and provisional. The study contributes a documented instrument, a replicable oral-  
administration protocol for older learners with heterogeneous literacy, and a first descriptive  
profile of this population, together with an eight-component socio-affective teaching  
framework proposed for future evaluation.  
Keywords: socio-affective strategies; older adults; English as a foreign language; rural  
education; lifelong learning; Ecuador  
INTRODUCCIÓN  
Population ageing is one of the defining demographic processes of the twenty-first century, and  
international policy has responded by framing lifelong learning as a right and as a determinant of  
wellbeing in later life. The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development calls for inclusive, equitable,  
quality education and lifelong learning opportunities for all (1); the World Health Organization  
defines active and healthy ageing as the optimization of opportunities for health, participation,  
and security throughout the life course (2,3); and the Inter-American Convention on Protecting  
the Human Rights of Older Persons, ratified by Ecuador, explicitly recognizes older persons' right  
to education adapted to their interests and needs (4). Ecuador's own normative framework points  
in the same direction: the Constitution establishes education as a lifelong right (5) and the Organic  
65  
ESTRATEGIAS SOCIOAFECTIVAS PARA LA ENSEÑANZA DEL INGLÉS A ADULTOS MAYORES: ESTUDIO DIAGNÓSTICO DE MÉTODOS  
MIXTOS EN LA COMUNIDAD RURAL DE SIDCAY, ECUADOR  
Law on Older Adults mandates educational inclusion for persons aged 65 and over (6). These  
instruments frame English learning for rural older adults as a right pending fulfilment.  
Against this normative backdrop, the empirical situation of English language learning in Ecuador  
is unfavourable. In the EF English Proficiency Index 2025, Ecuador ranked 83rd among 123  
countries and territories, with one of the lowest scores in Latin America (7); the index uses a self-  
selected online sample and is indicative rather than representative. Formal English provision  
concentrates on children, adolescents, and university students, while older adults, particularly in  
rural areas, are practically absent from both provision and research. Yet a growing international  
literature shows that foreign language learning (FLL) in the third age is feasible and beneficial: it  
is associated with cognitive stimulation and possible protective effects against age-related decline  
(8-10), with gains in subjective wellbeing, self-confidence, and social integration (11,12), and with  
socio-affective factors emerging as central drivers of success (13,14).  
Socio-affective strategies occupy a specific place in the language learning strategy literature. In  
Oxford's taxonomy (15), affective strategies (lowering anxiety, self-encouragement, monitoring  
emotions) and social strategies (asking questions, cooperating with peers, empathizing) form two  
of the six major strategy groups, while O'Malley and Chamot (16) group them as a single socio-  
affective category operating through interaction with others and control over affect. Two classic  
mechanisms explain why they matter. The affective filter hypothesis proposes that anxiety, low  
self-confidence, and low motivation raise a filter that blocks comprehensible input from  
becoming acquisition (17); socio-affective strategies operate precisely by lowering that filter.  
Sociocultural theory locates learning in socially mediated activity within the zone of proximal  
development (18), so cooperation, peer support, and guided interaction are not accessories but  
the very mechanism of development. In this study, socio-affective teaching strategies are defined  
as intentional instructional actions that integrate emotional support and structured social  
interaction to foster motivation, confidence, and participation.  
For older learners these strategies are structural rather than peripheral. Andragogy suggests that  
adults learn best when instruction is based on their self-direction, draws on their accumulated  
experience, and is problem-solving and immediately relevant (19); critical pedagogy introduces a  
dialogic element in which learners co-construct knowledge (20); and foreign language geragogy  
proposes that age-related change be considered a design parameter rather than a deficit and that  
internalized ageist beliefs be counteracted (21). On the affective side, foreign language classroom  
anxiety, which includes communication apprehension, fear of negative evaluation and test  
anxiety, is consistently related to avoidance of oral participation (22), while anxiety and  
enjoyment are partially independent, reducing anxiety and increasing enjoyment are different  
pedagogical tasks (23). Integrative and instrumental orientations (24) and learners' future self-  
images (25) keep older adults engaged in the long run, while for older adults, documented  
motives are mostly intrinsic and social, not occupational (11,12).  
The empirical research on third-age FLL has been rapidly expanding. Foreign language training  
has been suggested as cognitive therapy against age-related decline due to the recruitment of  
neural networks that overlap with those that are most affected by ageing (8,26). Intervention  
studies provide some support: intensive courses were effective in enhancing attentional  
66  
ESTRATEGIAS SOCIOAFECTIVAS PARA LA ENSEÑANZA DEL INGLÉS A ADULTOS MAYORES: ESTUDIO DIAGNÓSTICO DE MÉTODOS  
MIXTOS EN LA COMUNIDAD RURAL DE SIDCAY, ECUADOR  
switching in older participants (9); and reviews found that FLL can maintain or improve cognitive  
functions in healthy older adults, but reported small sample sizes and heterogeneous designs  
(10,27). Socio-affective outcomes are also well represented: wellbeing, enjoyment, and social  
contact (11,12); appreciation of oral practice and group belonging with no significant cognitive  
gains (14); and self-efficacy and group cohesion conditioning both language gains and wellbeing  
benefits (13). Senior learners also deploy compensatory strategies that instruction should  
legitimate and train (28). Regarding content, meaningful learning indicates anchoring new  
material in prior knowledge (29); a communicative orientation that prioritizes functional ability  
over formal accuracy (30) suggests that the realistic horizon is the Pre-A1 and A1 oral descriptors  
of the Common European Framework of Reference (31).  
This literature is geographically skewed: most studies come from European or North American  
urban contexts (27,32), and Latin American rural communities are almost entirely unrepresented;  
no study of this population in rural Ecuador was located. Sidcay, a rural community of Ricaurte  
parish in Cuenca canton, Azuay province, illustrates the gap: its older adults participate actively  
in community programmes and express interest in learning English, but no formal provision exists  
for them and no descriptive evidence is available on which a programme could be built. The  
general objective is therefore to produce a first descriptive account of the socio-affective  
conditions surrounding English language learning among older adults in Sidcay. Four specific  
objectives operationalize it: (a) to characterize reported motivation and perceived value; (b) to  
describe reported affective barriers and social-relational preferences; (c) to describe reported  
content and methodological preferences; and (d) to propose, for future evaluation, a framework  
of socio-affective teaching strategies informed by the observed response patterns. The study  
addresses four research questions: RQ1, what levels of motivation and perceived value do  
participants report?; RQ2, what affective barriers and social-relational preferences do they  
report?; RQ3, what content and methodological preferences do they express?; and RQ4, which  
socio-affective teaching strategies merit testing given the observed profile? Because the  
instrument was newly designed, unbalanced in wording, and orally administered to a small  
convenience sample, the study is framed as descriptive and provisional. Its contribution lies in  
documenting an instrument, a field protocol, and a first response profile, not in estimating  
population parameters or pedagogical effects.  
MATERIALES Y MÉTODOS  
The study used a concurrent, quantitatively weighted mixed-methods diagnostic design.  
Quantitative and qualitative material was collected during the same fieldwork period and  
analysed separately, but the brief qualitative component was used only to contextualize the  
survey patterns. It was not treated as an independent thematic study or as respondent-level  
validation. The scope was descriptive and the design non-experimental and cross-sectional: it  
characterized socio-affective conditions at one point in time as a basis for pedagogical design  
(33,34). No intervention was applied.  
67  
ESTRATEGIAS SOCIOAFECTIVAS PARA LA ENSEÑANZA DEL INGLÉS A ADULTOS MAYORES: ESTUDIO DIAGNÓSTICO DE MÉTODOS  
MIXTOS EN LA COMUNIDAD RURAL DE SIDCAY, ECUADOR  
Fieldwork took place in Sidcay, a rural community of Ricaurte parish, Cuenca canton, Azuay  
province, Ecuador, whose older adult population participates regularly in community-centre and  
parish activities. The 2022 census confirms the sustained ageing of the national population and  
the weight of older adults in rural parishes (35). The survey sample comprised 25 adults selected  
through non-probabilistic convenience sampling. Inclusion criteria were age 60 or over, voluntary  
participation with signed informed consent, regular attendance at community programmes, and  
no self-reported condition impeding participation in an orally administered survey. The sample  
included 15 women (60.0%) and 10 men (40.0%), aged 62-78 years (M = 70.0, SD = 4.5).  
Educational attainment was heterogeneous: 9 participants (36.0%) reported none or incomplete  
primary education, 6 (24.0%) completed primary education, and 10 (40.0%) reported secondary  
education or higher. Five people were recruited purposively for the separate qualitative  
component. They were not linked respondent-by-respondent to the survey dataset and were  
assigned interview codes I01-I05, distinct from survey codes P01-P25.  
Two instruments and one procedural record were used. First, a researcher-designed  
questionnaire contained 24 Likert-type items (1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree)  
organized a priori into four six-item content dimensions: motivation and perceived value (MOT),  
affective barriers (BAR), social-relational preferences (SOC), and learning needs and preferences  
(NEC). Item content was derived from the socio-affective strategy literature (15,16), foreign  
language anxiety research (22), and third-age foreign-language studies (13,21). Three expert  
judges in English language teaching and research methodology reviewed clarity, relevance, and  
cultural adequacy. This process supported content validity only; it did not establish a four-factor  
structure. The sample was too small for exploratory or confirmatory factor analysis, so  
dimensionality remains untested. Internal consistency was estimated separately for each a priori  
dimension (36): alpha = 0.772 for MOT, 0.798 for BAR, 0.782 for SOC, and 0.749 for NEC. No total-  
scale alpha or total score was used, because the four domains are conceptually distinct. All MOT,  
SOC, and NEC items were positively worded, whereas all BAR items were negatively worded; the  
instrument included neither balanced keying nor a separate acquiescence indicator. Second, an  
eight-question semi-structured interview guide addressed language-learning history, emotions,  
motives, fears, relational preferences, useful content, expected teacher behaviour, and  
expectations. A field log additionally recorded administration conditions; it served as a procedural  
record and was not analysed as a data source.  
Authorization was obtained from the community centre leadership and parish authorities, and  
the study was presented at a community meeting. Given participants' heterogeneous literacy, the  
questionnaire was administered orally and individually in Spanish: the researcher read each item,  
checked comprehension, and recorded the response; administration lasted approximately 20  
minutes. This procedure reduced literacy demands but may have increased interviewer-presence  
and acquiescence effects. Interviews were conducted individually in Spanish in a quiet room of  
the community centre, audio-recorded with consent, transcribed verbatim, and lasted  
approximately 2-7 minutes. All data were collected in July 2026.  
Quantitative analysis comprised item- and dimension-level means, standard deviations, and  
percentage agreement (responses of 4 or 5), together with dimension-specific Cronbach alpha.  
68  
ESTRATEGIAS SOCIOAFECTIVAS PARA LA ENSEÑANZA DEL INGLÉS A ADULTOS MAYORES: ESTUDIO DIAGNÓSTICO DE MÉTODOS  
MIXTOS EN LA COMUNIDAD RURAL DE SIDCAY, ECUADOR  
Because the small sample, shared administration session, and wording-direction confound make  
inter-dimension associations especially vulnerable to common-method and acquiescence effects,  
no correlation was used as substantive evidence and no hypothesis test was conducted. Analyses  
were run in Python with reproducible data-processing scripts. The five brief interviews were  
examined through semantic descriptive coding informed by thematic-analysis procedures (37)  
and supported by a coding matrix (38). The matrix served as an audit record for code-category-  
excerpt links; complete transcripts were reread, and discrepant accounts were retained rather  
than forced into consensus. The sole researcher conducted the interviews and coding; no  
independent second coding or member checking was undertaken. Outputs are therefore  
reported as recurring topical categories, not saturated themes. Integration used a joint display to  
examine complementarity between two unlinked samples; no respondent-level convergence was  
inferred.  
All participants were informed about the study, its purpose, audio recording, anonymity, and the  
right to withdraw without any consequences, and they were asked to participate in the study  
voluntarily. The identities of the surveys were anonymized as P01-P25 and the identities of the  
interviews were anonymized as I01-I05. All data was kept on password protected devices that  
were only accessible to the researcher. The study was conducted following the ethical guidelines  
of Universidad Politécnica Estatal del Carchi and the protection of older adults established in the  
national legislation (6).  
RESULTADOS  
The survey involved 25 participants: 15 women (60.0%) and 10 men (40.0%), aged 62 to 78 years  
(M = 70.0, SD = 4.5); 12 (48.0%) were aged 60-69 years and 13 (52.0%) were aged 70-79 years.  
Educational attainment was diverse, with secondary education or higher the most frequent  
category (n = 10, 40.0%), followed by none or incomplete primary education (n = 9, 36.0%) and  
completed primary education (n = 6, 24.0%). Table 1 summarizes the sociodemographic profile.  
No participant was aged 80 or over, so the findings describe the young-old and middle-old  
segments of the community rather than the oldest-old.  
Table 1. Sociodemographic characteristics of participants (n = 25).  
Variable  
Sex  
Category  
Female  
Male  
60-69  
70-79  
f
%
15  
10  
12  
13  
0
60.0  
40.0  
48.0  
52.0  
0.0  
Age group  
80 or over  
Educational level  
None / incomplete primary  
9
6
10  
36.0  
24.0  
40.0  
Complete primary  
Secondary or higher  
Note. f = frequency. Source: field survey.  
69  
ESTRATEGIAS SOCIOAFECTIVAS PARA LA ENSEÑANZA DEL INGLÉS A ADULTOS MAYORES: ESTUDIO DIAGNÓSTICO DE MÉTODOS  
MIXTOS EN LA COMUNIDAD RURAL DE SIDCAY, ECUADOR  
Internal consistency for the four a priori dimensions was alpha = 0.772 for motivation and  
perceived value, 0.798 for affective barriers, 0.782 for social-relational preferences, and 0.749 for  
learning needs and preferences. These coefficients are reported only as dimension-specific  
reliability estimates in this administration; they do not demonstrate factor structure. A total-scale  
coefficient was not calculated or interpreted, because the four domains are conceptually distinct.  
Motivation and perceived value was the highest-rated dimension (M = 3.95, SD = 0.66), with  
70.0% of item responses in the agreement categories. The highest-rated items were the desire to  
learn words and phrases (MOT1; M = 4.08, 76.0% agreement) and viewing English learning as an  
important personal achievement (MOT3; M = 4.08, 76.0%); the lowest was feeling good about  
learning new things at this age (MOT6; M = 3.60, 52.0%). Affective barriers showed a moderate  
mean (M = 2.86, SD = 0.79), and only 25.3% of barrier-item responses indicated agreement. Fear  
of making mistakes was the highest-rated barrier (BAR2; M = 3.08, 24.0% agreement), followed  
by frustration when not understanding (BAR5; M = 2.92, 32.0%); embarrassment about speaking  
before others was the lowest (BAR1; M = 2.64, 24.0%).  
Social-relational preferences were endorsed at a comparable level (M = 3.81, SD = 0.74; 60.0%  
agreement). Feeling comfortable with same-age peers (SOC3; M = 3.88, 64.0%) and feeling valued  
when sharing life experiences (SOC5; M = 3.88, 64.0%) were the highest-rated items. Songs,  
games, and group dynamics were the lowest-rated item in this dimension, although still above  
the scale midpoint (SOC4; M = 3.68, 56.0%). Learning needs and preferences also showed a  
moderately high mean (M = 3.73, SD = 0.66; 59.3% agreement). Participants most strongly  
endorsed speaking and listening before writing (NEC4; M = 3.96, 72.0%) and interest in family and  
community topics (NEC3; M = 3.92, 68.0%). Community-based objects, images, and examples  
received the lowest endorsement (NEC6; M = 3.40, 36.0%). Table 2 details item- and dimension-  
level statistics and, as shown in Figure 1, motivation and perceived value ranked highest, followed  
by social-relational preferences and learning needs, whereas affective barriers ranked lowest.  
Table 2. Descriptive statistics by item and dimension (n = 25).  
Dimension / item  
M
SD  
%
agreement  
70.0  
Motivation and perceived value (MOT) - dimension  
MOT1 I would like to learn words and phrases in English.  
MOT2 Learning English would keep my mind active.  
MOT3 Learning English would be an important personal  
achievement for me.  
3.95  
4.08  
4.04  
4.08  
0.66  
0.76  
0.84  
1.00  
76.0  
76.0  
76.0  
MOT4 I would like to use simple English phrases with my family or  
4.00  
0.96  
72.0  
with visitors.  
MOT5 I would gladly attend English classes in my community.  
MOT6 Learning new things at my age makes me feel good.  
Affective barriers (BAR) - dimension  
BAR1 I feel embarrassed speaking English in front of other people.  
BAR2 I am afraid of making mistakes when I try to say something in  
English.  
3.92  
3.60  
2.86  
2.64  
3.08  
1.00  
1.15  
0.79  
1.11  
1.12  
68.0  
52.0  
25.3  
24.0  
24.0  
BAR3 I get nervous when I think about learning a new language.  
BAR4 I feel I am no longer of an age to learn English.  
BAR5 I get frustrated easily when I do not understand something.  
2.88  
2.88  
2.92  
1.27  
0.93  
1.26  
28.0  
20.0  
32.0  
70  
ESTRATEGIAS SOCIOAFECTIVAS PARA LA ENSEÑANZA DEL INGLÉS A ADULTOS MAYORES: ESTUDIO DIAGNÓSTICO DE MÉTODOS  
MIXTOS EN LA COMUNIDAD RURAL DE SIDCAY, ECUADOR  
BAR6 I feel insecure when participating in front of a group.  
Social-relational preferences (SOC) - dimension  
SOC1 I prefer learning in a group rather than alone.  
SOC2 I like helping my classmates and being helped by them.  
SOC3 I feel more comfortable learning with people of my own age.  
SOC4 Songs, games, and group activities encourage me to  
participate.  
2.76  
3.81  
3.84  
3.76  
3.88  
3.68  
1.01  
0.74  
1.11  
0.88  
1.27  
1.14  
24.0  
60.0  
60.0  
56.0  
64.0  
56.0  
SOC5 Sharing my life experiences in class would make me feel  
valued.  
SOC6 The teacher's kind and patient treatment is very important to  
3.88  
3.80  
0.88  
1.04  
64.0  
60.0  
me.  
Learning needs and preferences (NEC) - dimension  
NEC1 I am interested in learning English about greetings and daily  
life.  
3.73  
3.88  
0.66  
0.88  
59.3  
64.0  
NEC2 I am interested in learning English about health topics.  
NEC3 I am interested in learning English about family and  
community.  
3.60  
3.92  
1.00  
1.04  
56.0  
68.0  
NEC4 I prefer speaking and listening rather than writing in English.  
NEC5 I need classes to move slowly and with plenty of repetition.  
NEC6 I would like classes to use objects, images, and examples from  
my community.  
3.96  
3.64  
3.40  
1.02  
1.08  
0.91  
72.0  
60.0  
36.0  
Note. Scale 1-5. % agreement = responses 4 or 5. Items were administered orally in Spanish and are translated here.  
MOT, SOC, and NEC items were positively worded; BAR items were negatively worded. Comparisons across  
dimensions may therefore reflect acquiescence and wording direction as well as substantive content. Source: field  
survey.  
Figura 1. Medias por dimensión con desviaciones estándar (n = 25).  
71  
ESTRATEGIAS SOCIOAFECTIVAS PARA LA ENSEÑANZA DEL INGLÉS A ADULTOS MAYORES: ESTUDIO DIAGNÓSTICO DE MÉTODOS  
MIXTOS EN LA COMUNIDAD RURAL DE SIDCAY, ECUADOR  
Dispersion was substantial at item level and qualifies every mean reported above. All 24 item  
means fell between 2.64 and 4.08, so no item approached the floor or the ceiling of the scale; 19  
of the 24 means lay above the midpoint of 3.00, and the five below it were all barrier items. Item  
standard deviations ranged from 0.76 to 1.27, and 16 of the 24 items returned a standard  
deviation at or above 1.00, with eight at or above 1.10. On a five-point scale answered by 25  
people, dispersion of this magnitude indicates that respondents did not answer uniformly within  
any dimension. Within-dimension spread of item means also differed markedly: social-relational  
preferences was the most homogeneous dimension (item means 3.68-3.88, spread 0.20),  
whereas learning needs and preferences was the most differentiated (3.40-3.96, spread 0.56).  
Agreement percentages followed the same pattern, ranging from 56.0% to 64.0% across the  
social-relational items but from 36.0% to 72.0% across the learning-needs items. The lowest  
agreement recorded for any item was 20.0% (BAR4, feeling too old to learn English) and the  
highest was 76.0%, shared by three motivation items. Group averages therefore conceal a  
distribution in which a substantial minority answered against the dimension trend on most items.  
Across the instrument, all positively worded MOT, SOC, and NEC items had means above the scale  
midpoint, whereas the negatively worded BAR items had lower means overall. The wording  
confound is complete: all 18 MOT, SOC, and NEC items were positively keyed and all six BAR items  
negatively keyed, so no item permits the two influences to be separated. Pooled across items,  
the positively worded set averaged 3.83 and the negatively worded set 2.86, a difference of 0.97  
scale points that coincides exactly with the wording split. Because responses were also elicited  
orally, this pattern is compatible with acquiescent responding and interviewer effects as well as  
with substantive differences, and their relative magnitude cannot be estimated from these data.  
Dimension rankings and positive-item endorsement are therefore provisional response patterns  
rather than clean estimates of construct differences. Accordingly, the descriptive contrasts in  
Table 2 are presented without hypothesis tests, factor-based scores, or respondent-level causal  
interpretation. No correction for acquiescence was estimated, because the instrument included  
neither content-balanced item pairs nor an independent response-style measure.  
The five brief interviews yielded four recurring topical categories used to contextualize, rather  
than validate, survey responses. The first, English as connection, activity, and agency, grouped  
accounts of mental activity, recovering forgotten knowledge, family communication, and  
interaction with visitors. I02 described learning as a way to remain active through knowledge,  
while I05 emphasized speaking with children and understanding grandchildren (I02; I05).  
The second category, varied emotional readiness, retained contrasting accounts. Some  
interviewees denied that fear was a barrier to learning, others mentioned nervousness,  
embarrassment, pronunciation, grammar, and potential ridicule. I01 shared concerns that  
individuals might be ridiculed for their pronunciation, while I03 shared that they were willing to  
attend with a desire to learn instead of fear (I01; I03). These accounts were not reconciled  
because it is impossible to determine which one is more dominant with a group of five.  
72  
ESTRATEGIAS SOCIOAFECTIVAS PARA LA ENSEÑANZA DEL INGLÉS A ADULTOS MAYORES: ESTUDIO DIAGNÓSTICO DE MÉTODOS  
MIXTOS EN LA COMUNIDAD RURAL DE SIDCAY, ECUADOR  
The third category, safety through supportive and dynamic teaching, included the preferences for  
group participation, peers of similar age or ability, teacher kindness, encouragement,  
participatory activities, music, images, videos, and manageable groups. I03 showed how critical  
trust is by noting that a learner might not come back when a teacher instills fear or degrades the  
learner (I03).  
The fourth category, functional oral English in family and community contexts, included greetings,  
health, family communication, visitors, everyday exchanges, and familiar community activities.  
I05 mentioned talking to children, understanding grandchildren and greeting others, and I03  
proposed family, local businesses, gardens and community life as class topics. These categories  
are summarized in Table 3, but cannot be said to be prevalent or saturated.  
Table 3. Recurring topical categories and illustrative quotations.  
Topical category  
C1. English as  
connection, activity, and  
agency  
Indicative content  
Mental activity; recovering  
knowledge; family  
Illustrative quotation (translated; code)  
Keeping myself active through knowledge. (I02)  
communication; visitors and  
foreign people  
C2. Varied emotional  
readiness  
Confidence and curiosity;  
nervousness; embarrassment;  
fear of mistakes or ridicule  
Group learning; peer support;  
trusting teacher; participatory  
activities  
Pronunciation is very difficult, and I fear people  
will make fun of me. (I01)  
C3. Safety through  
supportive and dynamic  
teaching  
If the teacher makes you afraid, you do not  
return. (I03)  
C4. Functional oral  
English in family and  
community contexts  
Greetings; health; family;  
visitors; familiar community  
activities  
To speak with my children, understand my  
grandchildren, and greet people. (I05)  
Note. Categories summarize a brief interview set and are not prevalence estimates; no claim of thematic saturation  
is made. Source: interviews.  
Table 4 places the survey patterns beside related material from the separate interview sample to  
show complementarity. Interview accounts supplied concrete examples and contrasting cases  
within the same broad domains, but they cannot corroborate survey prevalence, because the  
samples were unlinked and unequal in size. The display is therefore an interpretive aid, not  
evidence of respondent-level convergence.  
Table 4. Joint display of complementary quantitative and qualitative material.  
Dimension  
Quantitative finding  
Related  
interview  
category  
C1  
Complementary contribution  
Motivation and  
perceived value  
Affective barriers  
M = 3.95, SD = 0.66;  
70.0% agreement  
M = 2.86, SD = 0.79;  
25.3% agreement  
Connection, activity, and agency supplied  
examples of possible motives.  
Contrasting emotional accounts showed  
why a group mean may obscure  
individual concerns.  
C2  
73  
ESTRATEGIAS SOCIOAFECTIVAS PARA LA ENSEÑANZA DEL INGLÉS A ADULTOS MAYORES: ESTUDIO DIAGNÓSTICO DE MÉTODOS  
MIXTOS EN LA COMUNIDAD RURAL DE SIDCAY, ECUADOR  
Social-relational  
preferences  
M = 3.81, SD = 0.74;  
60.0% agreement  
C3  
C4  
Descriptions of group participation and  
teacher trust contextualized social  
preferences.  
Examples involving greetings, family,  
health, and community illustrated  
possible content.  
Learning needs and  
preferences  
M = 3.73, SD = 0.66;  
59.3% agreement  
Note. The two samples were unlinked; the display shows complementarity, not respondent-level convergence.  
Source: author's elaboration.  
DISCUSIÓN  
In the answers to RQ1, the answers were relatively high for learning English for words and  
phrases, personal achievement, mental activity, and social contact. These topics are similar to  
those found in the third-age language-learning research (11,12). All motivation items were,  
however, positively worded and elicited orally. The resemblance to previous studies thus helps to  
generate hypotheses rather than test the observed level.  
As for RQ2, there was a mix of agreement with the negatively worded barrier items and accounts  
from the interviews of fear of mistakes, pronunciation difficulty, embarrassment, and possible  
ridicule. This item-level dispersion further supports this interpretation: 16 of 24 items have  
standard deviations of 1.00 or higher, and the group means mask true differences, so it would be  
a design mistake to assume that older learners are all alike in their emotional needs, regardless  
of the wording confound. Group learning, peer support and patient teacher were endorsed as  
positive, as was socially mediated learning and evidence of group belonging (13,14,18). However,  
both motivation and social preferences were positive, self-reported, and measured in a single  
assessment. Therefore, their exploratory association is not used as evidence; common-method  
variance and acquiescence are potential explanations. Emotional support is a reasonable  
precaution pedagogically, but needs to be tested in interventions.  
For RQ3, oral English related to daily life, health, family and community was the most common  
response, along with paced and concrete support. This aligns with meaningful learning and  
compensatory-strategy principles (28,29) and proposes Pre-A1/A1 oral targets (31). The  
preference items were positively worded, so these priorities should be validated by cognitive  
interviewing, forced-choice or ranking tasks, and pilot observation prior to a curriculum being  
determined. The relatively weak endorsement of community-based objects and images (NEC6; M  
= 3.40) also supports the need to engage in negotiation with learners over materials rather than  
assuming local relevance.  
There are only three contributions that can be made without going beyond the evidence. First,  
the study reports the development of a 24-item instrument, its dimension-level reliability, and  
the wording limitation and revisions needed for a population for which no instrument had been  
previously available in Ecuador, which should be corrected by others rather than repeated.  
Second, it outlines a feasible method of oral administration for older adults with diverse literacy,  
including the cost of interviewer presence, a practical limitation that written instruments cannot  
74  
ESTRATEGIAS SOCIOAFECTIVAS PARA LA ENSEÑANZA DEL INGLÉS A ADULTOS MAYORES: ESTUDIO DIAGNÓSTICO DE MÉTODOS  
MIXTOS EN LA COMUNIDAD RURAL DE SIDCAY, ECUADOR  
address for this population. Third, it offers a preliminary descriptive profile of the older adults in  
the Ecuadorian Andes who live in rural areas, along with an explicit measurement agenda. All of  
these contributions do not rely on the disputed inference from the dimension means.  
Table 5 provides a preliminary pedagogical framework for the diagnostic response patterns and  
interview examples and maps them to low-cost classroom options to answer RQ4. It is a  
discussion-based design proposal, not an empirical result; none of its strategies was implemented  
or evaluated in this study.  
Table 5. Provisional socio-affective teaching framework for future evaluation in Sidcay.  
Strategy  
Socio-affective  
mechanism  
Sample classroom action  
Provisional basis  
1. Trust circles at  
session start  
Lowering the affective  
filter through belonging  
(17)  
Five-minute opening  
Moderate barriers (BAR M  
= 2.86) and interview  
concerns about  
embarrassment and  
insecurity  
round sharing news or  
feelings in Spanish, closing  
with one English greeting  
2. Stable peer-support  
pairs  
Social mediation within  
the zone of proximal  
development (18)  
Fixed learning partners  
who rehearse dialogues  
before whole-group  
sharing  
Preference for group  
learning and peer support  
(SOC M = 3.81)  
3. Life-experience  
anchoring  
Meaningful learning (29);  
geragogical use of  
experience (21)  
Vocabulary built from  
participants' own stories,  
crops, trades, and family  
photos  
Functional family and  
community content (NEC M  
= 3.73; C1 and C4)  
4. Error-friendly norms  
with delayed, gentle  
correction  
Reduction of fear of  
negative evaluation (22)  
Public agreement that  
errors are learning steps;  
corrections modelled  
later, never person-  
targeted  
Fear of mistakes and  
possible ridicule in  
interview accounts (C2)  
5. Songs, games, and  
choral repetition  
Enjoyment as an engine of  
engagement (23); memory movement games  
support (28)  
Short repetitive songs and  
Interest in participatory  
activities and group  
dynamics (SOC4 M = 3.68;  
C3)  
recycling target phrases  
6. Slow-paced spiral  
recycling with  
multimodal support  
Geragogical pacing and  
compensatory design (21)  
Few items per session,  
large print, images and  
real objects, systematic  
recycling across sessions  
Personal achievement  
cards stamped each  
session; group celebration  
of milestones  
Need for paced learning  
and multimodal support  
(NEC5 M = 3.64; NEC6 M =  
3.40)  
Motivation and personal  
achievement (MOT M =  
3.95; MOT3 M = 4.08)  
7. Visible progress and  
celebratory feedback  
Self-efficacy and  
motivational self-image  
(24,25)  
8. Community  
showcases  
Social recognition within  
active ageing (2)  
Brief end-of-cycle  
demonstrations of  
greetings and phrases for  
family and neighbours  
Family and visitor  
communication motives  
and community connection  
(MOT4 M = 4.00; C1 and  
C4)  
Note. These unimplemented design options are the author's interpretation of provisional survey response patterns  
and brief interview examples; they require learner co-design and empirical evaluation.  
75  
ESTRATEGIAS SOCIOAFECTIVAS PARA LA ENSEÑANZA DEL INGLÉS A ADULTOS MAYORES: ESTUDIO DIAGNÓSTICO DE MÉTODOS  
MIXTOS EN LA COMUNIDAD RURAL DE SIDCAY, ECUADOR  
There were six restrictions on interpretation. First, the wording of the items was confounded  
with dimension: all the MOT, SOC and NEC items were positive and all the BAR items were  
negative. Part or all of the cross-dimension pattern may be due to acquiescence and interviewer  
effects, which are likely to be stronger when the question is administered orally. Second, all  
survey domains shared source, format, setting and occasion, which means that substantive  
interpretation of inter-dimensional associations is hindered by common-method variance. Third,  
the four dimensions were specified a priori. Content relevance, not factor structure, is supported  
by three expert reviews, and n = 25 is not sufficient for factor analysis. Fourth, the convenience  
sample from one community allows for only tentative contextual transfer. Fifth, the qualitative  
part consisted of five unlinked interviews (2-7 minutes) that were coded by one researcher  
without member checking or independent coding, and the categories are examples and contrasts,  
not saturation, prevalence or validation. The researcher's role in instrument design, interviewing,  
and analysis could also have led to a focus on socio-affective issues; although the coding matrix  
and the keeping of discrepant accounts provide a limited audit trail, these are not sufficient to  
eliminate this influence. Sixth, the cross-sectional design does not allow for effects to be  
determined and the framework is untested. Balanced wording or an acquiescence measure,  
cognitive pre-testing, larger validation sample, longer linked interviews, independent qualitative  
audit or participant feedback, and pilot intervention should be used in future work.  
CONCLUSIONES  
The results of this diagnostic study provide a preliminary description of the responses to the  
survey and brief accounts of the interviews in one rural community in Ecuador. First, the  
respondents supported the learning of English for personal achievement, mental activity, family  
communication and practical interaction. These results suggest topics to be confirmed, as there  
was wide dispersion of items and positive wording may have led to an inflated level of agreement,  
and a lack of oral administration.  
Second, endorsement of the affective barriers was not completely absent, as evidenced by some  
individual responses to nervousness, mistakes, embarrassment, and ridicule, and the distribution  
of responses to these items suggests that concerns were not evenly distributed. Group-based,  
supportive, and orally oriented instruction with a connection to daily life was also mentioned by  
interviewees. The examples support testing emotionally safe teaching practices, but the short,  
non-linked interviews do not provide any information on the extent of the preferences.  
Third, the eight-strategy framework is not an assessed outcome, but a proposed framework for  
future implementation based on the context. Its value will be determined by balanced measure  
validation, co-design by learners and pilot testing of participation and oral production. The study  
does add to the concrete: a documented instrument with its limitations explicitly stated, an oral  
administration protocol for learners with heterogeneous literacy, and a first descriptive profile of  
a population not found in the regional literature. No claims are made for generalisation beyond  
Sidcay, and the differences between questionnaire responses, illustrative interview accounts and  
tested pedagogical effects should be maintained in any programmatic use of the findings.  
76  
ESTRATEGIAS SOCIOAFECTIVAS PARA LA ENSEÑANZA DEL INGLÉS A ADULTOS MAYORES: ESTUDIO DIAGNÓSTICO DE MÉTODOS  
MIXTOS EN LA COMUNIDAD RURAL DE SIDCAY, ECUADOR  
REFERENCIAS BIBLIOGRÁFICAS  
1.  
2.  
3.  
4.  
5.  
6.  
7.  
8.  
United Nations. Transforming our world: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development  
(A/RES/70/1). Nueva York: United Nations; 2015.  
World Health Organization. Active ageing: a policy framework. Ginebra: World Health  
Organization; 2002.  
World Health Organization. Decade of healthy ageing: baseline report. Ginebra: World  
Health Organization; 2020.  
Organization of American States. Inter-American Convention on Protecting the Human  
Rights of Older Persons (A-70). Washington DC: OAS; 2015.  
Asamblea Nacional del Ecuador. Constitución de la República del Ecuador. Registro Oficial  
449, 20 de octubre de 2008. Quito: Asamblea Nacional del Ecuador; 2008.  
Asamblea Nacional del Ecuador. Ley Orgánica de las Personas Adultas Mayores. Registro  
Oficial Suplemento 484, 9 de mayo de 2019. Quito: Asamblea Nacional del Ecuador; 2019.  
EF Education First. EF English Proficiency Index 2025. Lucerna: EF Education First; 2025.  
Disponible en: https://www.ef.com/epi/  
Antoniou M, Gunasekera GM, Wong PCM. Foreign language training as cognitive therapy  
for age-related cognitive decline: a hypothesis for future research. Neuroscience and  
Biobehavioral Reviews. 2013;37(10):2689-98. doi:10.1016/j.neubiorev.2013.09.004  
Bak TH, Long MR, Vega-Mendoza M, Sorace A. Novelty, challenge, and practice: the impact  
of intensive language learning on attentional functions. PLoS ONE. 2016;11(4):e0153485.  
doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0153485  
9.  
10.  
11.  
Klimova B. Learning a foreign language: a review on recent findings about its effect on the  
enhancement of cognitive functions among healthy older individuals. Frontiers in Human  
Neuroscience. 2018;12:305. doi:10.3389/fnhum.2018.00305  
Klimova B, Pikhart M, Cierniak-Emerych A, Dziuba S, Firlej K. A comparative psycholinguistic  
study on the subjective feelings of well-being outcomes of foreign language learning in older  
adults from the Czech Republic and Poland. Frontiers in Psychology. 2021;12:606083.  
doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2021.606083  
12.  
13.  
14.  
Pikhart M, Klimova B. Maintaining and supporting seniors' wellbeing through foreign  
language learning: psycholinguistics of second language acquisition in older age.  
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2020;17(21):8038.  
doi:10.3390/ijerph17218038  
Pfenninger SE, Polz S. Foreign language learning in the third age: a pilot feasibility study on  
cognitive, socio-affective and linguistic drivers and benefits in relation to previous  
bilingualism of the learner. Journal of the European Second Language Association.  
2018;2(1):1-13. doi:10.22599/jesla.36  
Ware C, Damnee S, Djabelkhir L, Cristancho V, Wu YH, Benovici J, et al. Maintaining cognitive  
functioning in healthy seniors with a technology-based foreign language program: a pilot  
feasibility study. Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience. 2017;9:42. doi:10.3389/fnagi.2017.00042  
Oxford RL. Language learning strategies: what every teacher should know. Nueva York:  
Newbury House; 1990.  
O'Malley JM, Chamot AU. Learning strategies in second language acquisition. Cambridge:  
Cambridge University Press; 1990. doi:10.1017/CBO9781139524490  
15.  
16.  
77  
ESTRATEGIAS SOCIOAFECTIVAS PARA LA ENSEÑANZA DEL INGLÉS A ADULTOS MAYORES: ESTUDIO DIAGNÓSTICO DE MÉTODOS  
MIXTOS EN LA COMUNIDAD RURAL DE SIDCAY, ECUADOR  
17.  
18.  
19.  
Krashen SD. Principles and practice in second language acquisition. Oxford: Pergamon  
Press; 1982.  
Vygotsky LS. Mind in society: the development of higher psychological processes.  
Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press; 1978.  
Knowles MS, Holton EF, Swanson RA. The adult learner: the definitive classic in adult  
education and human resource development. 8th ed. Londres: Routledge; 2015.  
Freire P. Pedagogy of the oppressed. Nueva York: Continuum; 1970.  
Ramírez Gómez D. Language teaching and the older adult: the significance of experience.  
Bristol: Multilingual Matters; 2016.  
20.  
21.  
22.  
23.  
Horwitz EK, Horwitz MB, Cope J. Foreign language classroom anxiety. The Modern Language  
Journal. 1986;70(2):125-32. doi:10.1111/j.1540-4781.1986.tb05256.x  
Dewaele JM, MacIntyre PD. The two faces of Janus? Anxiety and enjoyment in the foreign  
language classroom. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching. 2014;4(2):237-74.  
doi:10.14746/ssllt.2014.4.2.5  
24.  
25.  
26.  
Gardner RC. Social psychology and second language learning: the role of attitudes and  
motivation. Londres: Edward Arnold; 1985.  
Dörnyei Z. The L2 motivational self system. En: Dörnyei Z, Ushioda E, editores. Motivation,  
language identity and the L2 self. Bristol: Multilingual Matters; 2009. p. 9-42.  
Antoniou M, Wright SM. Uncovering the mechanisms responsible for why language learning  
may promote healthy cognitive aging. Frontiers in Psychology. 2017;8:2217.  
doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2017.02217  
27.  
28.  
Klimova B, Pikhart M. Current research on the impact of foreign language learning among  
healthy seniors on their cognitive functions from a positive psychology perspective: a  
systematic review. Frontiers in Psychology. 2020;11:765. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00765  
Piechurska-Kuciel E, Szyszka M. Compensatory strategies in senior foreign language  
students. En: Gabryś-Barker D, editora. Third age learners of foreign languages. Bristol:  
Multilingual Matters; 2018. p. 108-24. doi:10.21832/9781783099412-009  
Ausubel DP. The acquisition and retention of knowledge: a cognitive view. Dordrecht:  
Kluwer Academic Publishers; 2000.  
Canale M, Swain M. Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language  
teaching and testing. Applied Linguistics. 1980;1(1):1-47. doi:10.1093/applin/I.1.1  
Council of Europe. Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: learning,  
teaching, assessment. Companion volume. Estrasburgo: Council of Europe Publishing; 2020.  
Disponible en: https://www.coe.int/lang-cefr  
29.  
30.  
31.  
32.  
33.  
34.  
35.  
36.  
Gabryś-Barker D, editora. Third age learners of foreign languages. Bristol: Multilingual  
Matters; 2018. doi:10.21832/9781783099412  
Creswell JW, Plano Clark VL. Designing and conducting mixed methods research. 3rd ed.  
Thousand Oaks: SAGE; 2018.  
Hernández-Sampieri R, Mendoza CP. Metodología de la investigación: las rutas cuantitativa,  
cualitativa y mixta. Ciudad de México: McGraw-Hill; 2018.  
Instituto Nacional de Estadística y Censos. Censo de Población y Vivienda 2022: resultados  
definitivos. Quito: INEC; 2023. Disponible en: https://www.censoecuador.gob.ec/  
Cronbach LJ. Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika.  
1951;16(3):297-334. doi:10.1007/BF02310555  
78  
ESTRATEGIAS SOCIOAFECTIVAS PARA LA ENSEÑANZA DEL INGLÉS A ADULTOS MAYORES: ESTUDIO DIAGNÓSTICO DE MÉTODOS  
MIXTOS EN LA COMUNIDAD RURAL DE SIDCAY, ECUADOR  
37.  
38.  
Braun V, Clarke V. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in  
Psychology. 2006;3(2):77-101. doi:10.1191/1478088706qp063oa  
Miles MB, Huberman AM, Saldaña J. Qualitative data analysis: a methods sourcebook. 4th  
ed. Thousand Oaks: SAGE; 2020.  
79