The word ‘motivation’, at its core, is derived from Latin, and it means ‘to move’. That means a study of motivation is a study of action. Previous studies have attempted to explain and define motivation over recent decades, and it has always been a major concern for research in educational psychology. Motivation is defined as a way to stimulate towards the desires and goals of oneself, practiced from a first or third person perspective and which, directly or indirectly, influences the course of direction of action, behavioural responses and sets of beliefs of an individual (Dornyei, 2001a; Schunk et al., 2008). As Dornyei and Otto (1998: 65) have suggested motivation is defined as “the dynamically changing cumulative arousal in
a person that imitates, directs, co-ordinates, amplifies, terminates and evaluates to cognitive and motor processes whereby initial wishes and desire are selected, prioritised, operationalised and (successful and unsuccessfully) acted out”. For
example, the attempt to communicate fluently with foreign clients in their own language at the workplace is a motivation, from the perspective of both the organisation and the individual(s) in question, and this demonstrates the desire and necessity to master the construction and usage of the English language.
Motivation is defined as “the process whereby goal-directed activity is instigated
and sustained” (Pintrich and Schunk, 2002:5); subsequently, it has widely been
organised into four distinct psychological dimensions which include: energising goal directed behaviour; supporting students to engage in learning; directing the behaviour of students towards goals; and helping to regulate determination towards goals (Alderman 2004; Ford 1992). Based on these dimensions, it is believed that if students were motivated to master one subject, the logical assumption is that they will undertake goal-related activities, such as signing up for evening classes, self-regulating learning, etc. As a consequence, motivations are able to describe the reason why each individual decides to set their own goals, the sustainability of insisting the goal, and how rigorous each individual is going to pursue their goal(s). Considerable research in motivation focuses upon the relationship between actions and the beliefs and goals of students; therefore, motivation is continuously accepted
19
as a main driving force that may affect student outcomes and their behaviour in learning. However, most research in motivation has discovered that it is very difficult for a single uniform theory to explain all possible scenarios but that due to multi-dimensional and other complexities there are different types of motivation (Larsen-Freeman, 2001). This means that motivation has to be studied in a particular context, such as sports or language learning, in order to describe accurately the specific motivation that drives participants. Furthermore, the motivation theories presented in this thesis are focussed on the research of assessing the relations between integrated motivations and academic achievement, and these will be explained more thoroughly in subsequent sections.
2.2.2 Motivation in language learning
The focus of second-language learning (L2) motivation theories has been highly discussed and debated greatly in a number of studies in the past few decades, and there has been a great deal of research examined the relationship with language learning and L2 motivation (Dornyei, 2001a; Dornyei and Ushioda, 2011; MacIntyre et al., 2009). Researchers in this field have already drawn attention to different aspects of language learning motivation theories that Gardner (1985) designated L2 motivation as a “combination of effort plus desire to achieve the goal of learning the
language”. Some researchers have attempted to build a model of motivation
concerning the process of language learning (Gardner and Lambert, 1972; Dornyei, 1994; Oxford, 1994; Oxford and Shearin, 1994; Gardner and Tremblay, 1994). The motivational model was created by Canadian psychologists, Gardner and his associates, who created the early seminal works in language learning motivation theories. Gardner and colleagues have suggested that the attitude of students and their goals are crucial, persistent attributes to language learning motivation.
In addition, whilst being considered as a crucial factor by a number of researchers, attitudes have had an influence on successful learning outcomes in language learning (Gardner and Maclntyre, 1993; Masgoret and Gardner, 2003; Ushioda, 2005;
20
Oroujlou and Vahedi, 2011). Many definitions have been proposed to describe the essence of attitude, which certain authors have attributed a causal link with behaviour in the area of second language acquisition (Gardner, 1985). As Gardner (1985) stated,
“attitude will influence the relative degree of success with which this can be achieved”. Considerable research has stressed further the significance of attitudes in
determining how successful an individual would be in acquiring it (Clement et al., 1994; Dornyei, 1994; Gardner, 1985).
The socio-educational Model, developed by Gardner and his colleagues, has dominated L2 learning motivation for three decades (Dornyei, 2005). Recent research, however, has questioned its specific application to in EFL (English as foreign language context) contexts (Clement, Dornyei, and Noels, 1994; Warden and Lin, 2000) and its position in cognitive development in psychology (Dornyei, 2005). As a result, a number of research papers have raised the issue of reconceptualising L2 motivation constructs (e.g. Crooks and Schmidt, 1991; Dornyei, 1994; Oxford and Shearin, 1994). Dornyei (1994), in his study, proposed a new framework to expand the components of foreign language learning, suggesting that the nature of language learning motivation depends on “who learns what language where” (p.280). His model was based on three different levels: language level (what), learner level
(who), and learning situation level (where). The first component, language level
included integrative motivation and instrumental motivation. The second component, learner level consisting of the need for achievement, and self-confidence focused on the reasons for engagement in a task rather than an instinctive need. The third component, learning situation level, is associated with situation-specific motivation in the classroom, including course, teacher and learner group. However, following research argued the components were diverse and did not cover sufficient components (Dornyei, 1998). Furthermore, the main focus in this study is on student language learning motivation in ability grouping context, rather than the influence from the learning situation. Thus, this study, in terms of the Dornyei Framework, deliberately concentrates on the language level and learner level.
21
Overall, motivation can influence what, when, and how we learn, and is considered to be a determining factor in developing a second and foreign language skill (Oxford and Shearin, 1994). Schunk (1995) stated in the research that students are motivated to participate in a task that ‘they believe will help them learn’. Students with high motivations are willing to participate in class, systematically organise their materials, and ask for help if they have difficulty understanding the task. On the other hand, with less motivation to learn, students may feel unwilling or feel a sense of apathy towards engaging in the classroom activities, be inattentive in the class, and they may not ask for help when they encounter difficulty comprehending. That is, motivation is one significant factor that affects learning and performance (Pintrich, 2003; Schunk, 1995). Thus, to recognise the motivation of students is an important issue for second or foreign languages teachers and this will enable them to understand the needs of students and to raise the level of motivation in language learning. This will appeal particularly to curriculum development as amending the learning process for factors, such as attitude, helps to foster effective learning from the perspective of the teacher and will appeal generally to the expectations of the students (Schmit and Watanabe, 2001: P.314)