Exploring Differences in Motivation between Students Who Excelled and Underperformed in Learning English Language

Khoo Hooi ShyanThe University of Nottingham Graduate School

The theoretical framework for this research is the tripartite motivation construct of learner-internal factor, social psychological perspective and pragmatic gains. The orientations were based on the measurement scheme developed by Dörnyei et al. (2006) and had been tested in the Asian context of China, Japan and Iran by researchers Taguchi, Magid, & Papi in 2009. From the three main components, related variables are generated. In this study, students’ motivation levels will be examined based on the responses towards the variables.

For the dimension of learner-internal factor, factors like need for achievement; motivational intensity; attitudes toward learning English and perceived group cohesion in student are examined. The learner-internal orientation reflects the learners’ internal belief and aspirations on the mastery of L2.

The social psychological milieu encompasses sociocultural, family, friendship orientations; anxiety in class; English use anxiety; attitudes towards learning English. They relate to the general perception of the importance of foreign languages in the learners’ immediate environment and affective states of learning (Csizér, Dörnyei, 2005).

Pragmatic orientation has variables of instrumentality and integrativeness. Instrumentality refers to the perceived benefits of L2 mastery, be it knowledge gained or travel advantages that one believes one ought to possess by learning L2 (Dörnyei, 1998). Integrativeness reflects the outlook the learners possess on L2 and its culture, to the extent that they might want to resemble L2 speakers.

• Motivation, in its Latin root verb movere, means to move (Eccles & Wigfield, 2002)• It concerns the force behind a decision, the reason for an action in attainment of a goal (Dörnyei, 1998; Harmer, 2001; Ushioda, 2008) • High achievers are more driven than those who are not, even with the same level of intelligence • This resonates in the field of language learning where good language learners are motivated (Gardner & Lambert, 1972; Dörnyei, 1998;

Brown, 2000; Harmer, 2001; Chitravelu et al., 2005; Ushioda, 2008) • Motivation is an influential yet complex to define concept, more empirical research is still needed to grasp its antecedents of action

(Dörnyei, 2001) • Despite the amount of literature, researches on motivation occurrences with language learners are still insufficient (Ushioda, 2008) • Teachers’ sharing on classroom experiences on this matter would significantly benefit theorists and practitioners in the field (Ushioda,

2008)

• The study attempts to answer the following research questions: 1. What are the motivation levels of underperforming students learning English language?2. What are the motivation levels of students who excel in learning English language?3. How can the underperformers’ motivation levels be improved? Students with 80 marks and above in their English language subject during the midterm examination are classified as ‘excellent’ students or ‘students who excel’ while ‘underperformers’, ‘failing’ students have grades of less than 50.

• A mixed method approach is chosen questionnaire (quantitative) interview with English Language teachers (qualitative)

• This method enables the researcher to get a richer data from the integration of two different perspectives: teachers and students (Creswell, 2003)

Introduction Methodology Implications for ELE

• The questionnaire requires respondents to indicate the degree of suitability towards statements about their motivational levels with 1 being ‘strongly disagree’ and 6 ‘strongly agree’ • The response options ranges from 1 to 6 to increase the psychometric properties of the questionnaire (Wagner, 2010)• The participants consists of twenty students from each category: Form 2 excellent students; Form 2 underperformed students; Form 3 excellent students and Form 3 underperformed students• All students have received 4 periods (140 minutes) of classroom instruction every week from different teachers. The materials used are the

course books from Cambridge in Mind series• Students are asked to list down their English Language marks from their final examination on the survey forms to allow for filtering of excellent

and underperforming students in this particular subject. Filtering is done as assumption can not be made on the basis of academic excellence attributing to the success of English language learning and likewise (Little, 1985; Williams & Burden, 1999)

• The survey forms with Chinese translation are piloted to four students of Form 2 and Form 3 and relevant changes on the questionnaire are made • After that the researcher hands the students questionnaire with the instructions to fill in their marks on the paper but not their names. This is due to the notion that administering the research question in person, can lead to higher response rate and better results (Wagner, 2010) and also to answer questions that participants might have• Students are told to inquire on words, phrases or expressions that they are not familiar with. They are allowed to take home with them the questionnaires for completion. This is to create an unobtrusive and comfortable environment for students while answering questionnaires. It also seeks to encourage participants to be as truthful as possible• A short dialogue is conducted with the subject teachers on the motivation levels of both clusters of students and recommendation for improvements

With motivation vital in target language proficiency, teachers should concentrate on developing skills in motivating learners. (Dörnyei, 1998). From the Hungarian studies on middle school students, Dörnyei et al. (2006) emphasized on the importance of integrative factors in promoting L2 learning. Teachers should encourage students to have a perceptive mentality towards the L2 and its speakers. Teachers could familiarize students on cross-cultural awareness or share positive L2 related experiences, expose students to L2 cultural content, supplement lessons with authentic materials, invite L2 speakers or organize school trips to L2 community and alike (Dörnyei, 2001). It could be noted that imparting intrinsic values in students would improve motivation levels (Brophy, 1983; Corno & Rohrkemper, 1985 as cited in Pintrich & De Groot, 1990). With a higher sense of intrinsic motivation, students could be more engaged in their learning of a second language. Teacher could raise students’ awareness on self-regulating strategies such as having achievable learning goals, planning, monitoring students’ understanding and encouraging persistence to students”. Not only would this increase motivation as students realized the “steps” of learning a second language, it would also improve their performance (Corno, 1986; Zimmerman & Pons, 1986, 1988 as cited in Pintrich & De Groot, 1990).

Pedagogical common sense would proclaim that most students’ motivation can be worked on and increased. It is hoped that through this study, teachers would not resort to the conventional methods of reward and punishments but to on other potentially effective methods to improve the quality of teaching.

There are several limitations to these findings:

1. The responses are measured with a self-report instrument. Although there is verification from the English subject teachers, there still lies the validity threat of students’ truthfulness in answering all the questions.

2. There are also unmarked answers where students left the columns blank, this reduces the representation of findings.

3. Due to the sample participants being confined to Chinese Independent secondary school students, the results cannot be generalize to the rest of the population (all the 14, 15 year old students).

4. As motivation does not exist in pure form, the usage of one questionnaire restrict the measurement of motivation levels in different students (Dörnyei, 2001).

In this study, the researcher only examines the most salient data of motivation level according to the tripartite motivation construct of learner-internal factor, social psychological perspective and pragmatic gains, which is only a segmented research of the multifaceted construct of motivation. It can be recommended that a more elaborate research with all its constituents be carried out in future.

Theoretical Framework LimitationsSummary of DataFigure 5.2 Motivation levels of excellent and underperformed students

Instrumental

KnowledgeTrave

l

Family

Friendsh

ip

Sociocu

ltural

Integrative

Attitudes toward le

arning English

Need for a

chieve

ment

Motivational In

tensity

Anxiety

in class

English use

anxiety

Perceive

d group cohesio

n1

2

3

4

5

6

Excellent Underperformed