MOTIVATIONAL TEACHING STRATEGIES IN A BRAZILIAN EFL SCHOOL: HOW IMPORTANT ARE THEY AND HOW FREQUENTLY ARE THEY USED? A thesis presented to

Transcription

1 MOTIVATIONAL TEACHING STRATEGIES IN A BRAZILIAN EFL SCHOOL: HOW IMPORTANT ARE THEY AND HOW FREQUENTLY ARE THEY USED? A thesis presented to the faculty of the College of Arts and Sciences of Ohio University In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree Master of Arts Graziane de Oliveira Xavier June 2005

2 This thesis entitled MOTIVATIONAL TEACHING STRATEGIES IN A BRAZILIAN EFL SCHOOL: HOW IMPORTANT ARE THEY AND HOW FREQUENTLY ARE THEY USED? BY GRAZIANE DE OLIVEIRA XAVIER has been approved for the Department of Linguistics and the College of Arts and Sciences by David Michael Bell Assistant Professor of Linguistics Leslie A. Flemming Dean, College of Arts and Sciences

3 XAVIER, GRAZIANE DE OLIVEIRA. MA. June Linguistics Motivational teaching strategies in a Brazilian EFL school: How important are they and how frequently are they used? (146pp.) Thesis Director: David Michael Bell Abstract For over two decades, scholars in the field of second language teaching have proposed extensive lists of strategies to motivate language learners. However, the number of studies investigating the actual use of those strategies in L2 classrooms is meager. This paper examines the importance and frequency of 43 motivational strategies divided into 16 conceptual domains. Twenty-three teachers and 213 students of an EFL school in Brazil participated in the investigation. Quantitative and qualitative data were drawn from questionnaires, interviews, and classroom observations. The results suggest that from the 16 conceptual domains of motivational strategies, three are potentially motivating. Results also reveal that some strategies regarded as important have been underutilized in the classroom. In addition, based on the findings, implications and suggestions for motivating learning are drawn. Considerations for further research are also discussed. Approved: David Michael Bell Assistant Professor of Linguistics

4 4 Table of Contents Page Abstract...3 Table of Contents...4 List of Tables... 6 Chapter 1: Introduction... 7 Introduction...7 Justification of the study... 9 Purpose of the study...11 Research questions...11 Organization of the study...13 Chapter 2: Literature Review...15 Introduction...15 Motivation and early psychology...16 Motivation and educational psychology Motivation and instructional design...26 Motivation and second language teaching Motivation and L2 classroom-based research...35 Conclusion to Chapter Chapter 3: Method Introduction...38 Setting Participants...41 Teachers Students...42 Instruments...43 Questionnaires...43 Classroom observations Interviews...46 Procedures...48 Type of Data...48 Conclusion to Chapter

5 Chapter 4: Analysis and Results Introduction...50 Description of Dörnyei and Csizér s analysis of data...50 Xavier s study: analysis of data Categorization of strategies...57 Do Hungarian and Brazilian teachers agree?...64 Analysis based on Dörnyei and Csizér s ranking system...64 Analysis based on Xavier s ranking system...68 Hungarian and Brazilian teachers importance lists compared...71 Do Brazilian teachers and students agree?...73 Are strategies used in the classroom according to their importance? Frequency of strategies according to teachers data...78 Frequency of strategies according to students data...81 Frequency of strategies according to classroom observations Insights from teachers and students that may explain the results Conclusion to Chapter Chapter 5: Discussion Introduction...97 Initial discussion Factors affecting selection of strategies Importance of motivational strategies for Hungarian and Brazilian teachers Importance of motivational strategies for Brazilian teachers and students Frequency of motivational strategies Implications for L2 instruction Conclusion to Chapter Chapter 6: Summary and Conclusion Introduction Summary Limitations of the study Recommendations for future research Bibliography Appendix 1: Questionnaires Appendix 2: Observation checklist

6 6 List of Tables Table Page 1. Distribution of participating students Dörnyei and Csizér s motivational conceptual domains Xavier s initial list of strategies List of sixteen new strategies and subsequent actions Xavier s final list of CDs and subsumed strategies Teachers importance lists based on Dörnyei & Csizér s ranking system Teachers importance lists based on Xavier s ranking system Teachers and students importance ranking lists Teachers frequency list Students frequency list Frequency of strategies based on classroom observations Comments about the importance of CDs and strategies Comments about the frequency of CDs and strategies... 92

7 7 Chapter 1 Introduction Introduction I felt that most of the students were afraid of talking. They were anxious when they had to speak. It often happened, for example, that the teacher asked somebody to volunteer to speak. And nobody raised their hands, nobody, although we had already reached the proficiency level when we loved talking. But we couldn't raise our hands because of the atmosphere. We didn't go to class regularly. This class became the same as any other boring lecture. It was rare that the whole group was together. Because of the bad class, the group was not cohesive. We stood by each other in such a way that the teacher was on one side, and we were on the other, because none of us liked the teacher. The students lost the initiative; we didn't move forward. 1 The statement above depicts a situation many second language (L2) teachers face in their classrooms: students who do not attend classes, who do not participate, who are bored, and who are afraid of speaking in the L2; in summary, as most teachers would describe, students who are not motivated. For years, teachers had to rely exclusively on their own devices to deal with unmotivated students because L2 motivational theory and research offered very little on how to overcome the problem. Fortunately, the picture has changed over the last two decades. 1 Statement of Adam, a university student, about his experiences as a language learner, cited in Ehrman and Dörnyei, 1998, p. 3.

8 8 Discussion about how to motivate L2 learners began in the mid-1990s. Before that, L2 literature and research on the topic had given primary emphasis to what motivates learners and much was written about the sources of students motivation and their effects on learning. At that time, several theories and constructs proposed by psychologists and linguists attempted to explain the nature of L2 students motivation (e.g.: Gardner & Lambert, 1972). None, however, explored the topic from the practical view of teachers. Teachers were given explanations on what their students motivation was like, but no recommendations on how to implement that knowledge in their teaching practices were offered. It was only after a call to reopen the research agenda about L2 motivation posited by linguists Crookes and Schmidt in 1991 that L2 theoretical constructs started to be translated into more practical terms for classroom application. In a seminal paper in which they reviewed the research on L2 motivation, Crookes and Schmidt (1991) stated that discussion on this topic lacks validity in that it is not well-grounded in the real world domain of the SL [second language] classroom (p.470) and proposed a framework for future research on L2 motivation. Their call yielded a series of publications that explored the topic from both theoretical and practical perspectives (Brown, 1994; Dörnyei, 1994a, 1994b; Oxford and Shearin, 1994, 1996; Ushioda, 1994, 1996; Williams, 1994) and eventually redirected its focus to the applicability of motivational theories in the classroom. For the first time in the field of L2, sets of motivational principles and strategies were being designed for methodological and instructional purposes. By motivational teaching strategies, it is meant methods and techniques to generate and maintain the learners' motivation (Dörnyei, 2001a, p.2). However, only a few of these

9 9 works have investigated the actual use of motivational principles in L2 classrooms. The present study attempts to fill this gap. It assumes that only by verifying whether and to what extent motivational constructs and lists of strategies are applicable in the learning setting, will researchers and teachers be able to fully understand students motivation and provide more effective instruction. Justification of the study When examining the motivational conditions in public school classrooms in the United States, Brophy (1998) concluded that several factors made motivation difficult. First, school attendance is compulsory, and curriculum and learning activities are preselected, leaving students without much freedom to choose what they would like to do. Second, classrooms usually have large groups of students, making it difficult to meet students individual needs. Also, because classrooms are social settings, failures often produce personal disappointment and public embarrassment. Finally, there is also the fact that students works are usually graded, and reports are sent to their parents. The classroom setting I will explore in the present study, however, is a private EFL 2 school in Brazil (to be described more thoroughly later). Nonetheless, not only do the above factors apply to this school as well, but there are also further motivational problems. The learners contact with the target language is restricted to the classroom for contact with native speakers is scarce and acquisition of media in the target language is 2 EFL and ESL are acronyms for English as a foreign language and English as a second language, respectively. The former situation refers to instruction of English in countries where English is not spoken by the general population, whereas the latter situation refers to instruction of English in countries where English is the population s first language.

10 10 expensive. Because of this, students do not have much contact with the culture of the language they are learning, which may be de-motivating for some students. The duration of the course is also a problem. Language courses in Brazil usually take five to six years of instruction, requiring a long commitment from students. For adults, who have already many other responsibilities, this is particularly demanding and also a possible source of de-motivation. The actual time of instruction in the classroom poses another obstacle for motivation as well. Three hours per week does not provide students with satisfactory time of language use, which is a common source of complaint. There is also the fact that classrooms are most likely to have mixed groups of students with different ages, levels of proficiency, and interests. Finding motivational strategies that apply to all students of a mixed group is certainly difficult for the teacher. Furthermore, motivational literature in Brazil has focused on attitudes towards L2 (Brown, Cunha, Frota & Ferreira, 2001; El- Dash & Busnardo, 2001). Little has been written about strategies of motivation (Cruz, 2004) and, at least to my present knowledge, there has been no published study on the use of motivational strategies in Brazilian language classrooms. Finally, for all the above reasons and because during my eleven-year experience as an EFL teacher in Brazil I myself have failed to motivate students many times, I believe that a better understanding of the issue of L2 motivation can help me and other language teachers integrate effective instruction and student motivation in our teaching.

11 11 Purpose of the study The present study aims primarily at providing some useful information about the use of motivational teaching strategies in an EFL setting so that EFL teachers and ESL teachers in Brazil and other countries, may become more aware of and interested in understanding the motivational dynamics that take place in their classrooms. I intend to do so by replicating Dörnyei and Csizér s (1998) cross-sectional study on motivational teaching strategies in Hungary. Based on their investigation, the present study proposes, firstly, to verify whether and to what extent their results apply to the Brazilian context. In other words, it aims at finding out if Brazilian and Hungarian teachers agree on the importance and frequency of use of motivational strategies. What s more, the present study extends Dörnyei and Csizér s research in two aspects. It attempts to verify the use of motivational strategies from the student perspective as well. This will be accomplished by applying the same questionnaires for both teachers and students. Moreover, it also seeks to provide qualitative information about the importance and frequency of the strategies. This will be done by interviewing both teachers and students based on their answers to the questionnaires. Research questions The following three research questions were framed for this study: 1. Do Hungarian and Brazilian EFL teachers agree on the level of importance of

12 the motivational teaching strategies? If not, which strategies are regarded as more important for each group of teachers? Do Brazilian EFL teachers and students agree on the level of importance of the motivational teaching strategies? If not, which strategies are regarded as more important for each group of participants? 3. Are motivational teaching strategies used in the classrooms according to the relative importance attached to them by Brazilian teachers and students? If not, which ones have been underutilized? On the basis of the above questions, I draw three hypotheses. First, I expect to find disagreement on the importance of some, if not all, motivational strategies between Hungarian and Brazilian teachers. The reason is that their appraisal of certain motivational strategies might be culture-specific. I also hypothesize that Brazilian teachers and students will also disagree on the importance of some, if not all, motivational strategies. Recent research (Peacock, 1998) has found that learners and teachers have divergent perceptions about various aspects involved in learning, such as usefulness of materials and activities; therefore, I believe that this might also apply to teachers and students perceptions about the use of motivational strategies. My third hypothesis is that the frequency at which some, if not all, motivational strategies are used in the Brazilian classroom will not be in accordance with the importance attached to them, from both the teachers and students perspectives. This hypothesis is consistent

13 13 with the results of Dörnyei and Csizér s (1998) study, which showed that Hungarian teachers underutilized some strategies regarded as important. In addition to all this, I also believe that comments from both teachers and students will provide enlightening information that will explain in more depth the findings of this research, regardless of whether they confirm my hypotheses or not. Organization of the study This paper is organized around the issues involved in the experiment. It has 6 chapters, including this one. In Chapter 2, the review of the literature, I attempt to show the complexity of the issue of motivation and how it has unfolded. First, under the section motivation and early psychology, I provide some historical background information about how most prominent early psychological theories have approached human motivation. In the following section, motivation and educational psychology, I briefly describe more recent cognitive theories and how their perceptions of motivation have been applied in the educational context. Then, in the section motivation and instructional design, I briefly describe three instructional models of motivation developed by educational psychologists. Two of them were designed decades ago and have been widely used, and the third one is a more recent elaboration. In the section motivation and second language teaching, I discuss what insights the field of L2 has imported from psychology and instructional design and how motivational constructs in the field have emphasized applicable principles to stimulate students to learn an L2. Under this section, I also describe, in depth, the study upon which

14 14 I base my research. Finally, I conclude the chapter addressing the issue of motivation and L2 classroom-based research, where I briefly describe some studies conducted in actual L2 classrooms that have provided insightful evidence about the connection between motivation and instruction. By addressing the topic through all these different perspectives, I hope to provide the reader with a sense of how the issue of motivation has evolved from vague and broad theoretical approaches to empirical motivational L2 classroom-based research. In Chapter 3, I discuss the methodology of the present study. Here, I provide thorough descriptions of the educational setting where the research was conducted, the social and educational background of the participants involved, the instruments used, the procedures followed, and the types of data collected. In Chapter 4, the analysis of the data and results are presented. This will be done in the light of my research questions. Discussion about the results follows in Chapter 5, where the most relevant findings are interpreted supported by teachers and students insights, and where implications for L2 instruction are also addressed. Finally, Chapter 6 is the conclusion. Here, I summarize the present study, address some problems encountered, and discuss how the study may contribute to our present knowledge and practice of motivational teaching strategies.

15 15 Chapter 2 Literature Review Introduction Discussing motivation is not an easy task. In different contexts, the term has been used to signify a range of meaning from general disposition to do something, as a blanket term (Williams & Burden, 1997), to the initiation, direction, intensity, and persistence of behavior (Keller, 1983). It is a multifaceted theoretical construct composed of many overlapping factors, such as interest, curiosity, and a desire for something (Brophy, 1998), all of which may be caused, or enhanced, by either internal or external factors, or even both (Williams & Burden, 1997). The concept of motivation is so complex that it may be used to refer to both a stable personality trait and a volatile state (Dörnyei, 2001b); it may explain both a long-lasting commitment and an effortful performance in a temporary task. In the field of education, in particular, research has shown that motivation is closely linked to various elements, such as the learning environment, methodology, teacher, and students' needs (Chambers, 1999). Therefore, in order to be able to understand the status quo of the issue of motivation in the L2 field, it is necessary to know its origin and development. For this reason, in this review of the literature, I first provide background information about how motivational concepts have unfolded throughout the years, from early psychology to contemporary cognitive approaches. Then, I discuss how current constructs have been

16 16 applied in the educational context in general and in the field of L2. Most importantly, in this part of the paper, I describe the study upon which I build my research. Finally, I share some evidence from recent empirical L2 classroom-based research on motivation that indicates connection between motivation and instruction. Motivation and early psychology In the endeavor to understand human behavior, psychology has long given significant attention to motivation. This urge to comprehend motivation, its causes and effects on individuals, gave rise to a number of different theories. In general, psychological theories attempt to explain one or all of these three things: choice, or why someone decides to do something; effort, or how hard someone pursues the activity; and persistence, or how long someone sustains the activity (Pintrich & Schunk, 1996). However, each of these motivational approaches focuses on distinct aspects of the issue, attributing motivation to different sources (Williams & Burden, 1997), such as instincts, biological needs, and reinforcement of behavior. Consequently, as psychological theories have changed, so have the explanations and interpretations about the precise nature of motivation. The first motivational theory to have a significant impact on psychology was psychoanalysis, developed by Sigmund Freud in the beginning of the twentieth century (see in Mackay, 1989, and Pintrich & Schunk, 1996). Freud defined motivation as a psychical energy formed by the instincts of life (Eros) and death (Thanatos). It is these two instincts, which are part of the individual s unconscious, that compel humans to act

17 17 (Chambers, 1999). Based on this, psychoanalysis suggests that motivation is an internal driving force outside of one s personal control (Williams & Burden, 1997). Although extensive, Freud s theory is inconsistent and vague (Mackay, 1989). Moreover, it fails to consider environmental, cognitive and social factors as part of the motivational construct. In the middle of the same century, Freud s theory was challenged by two other theories, behaviorist and drive theories. Behaviorist theories, such as Pavlov s classical conditioning (1927) and Skinner s operant conditioning (1953), claimed that motivation arises, increases or is sustained as behavior to the extent that it is reinforced. More specifically, they postulated that individuals are conditioned to take actions by being rewarded or punished. Therefore, for behaviorism, external forces play a more important role in determining motivation than internal forces (Pintrich & Schunk, 1996; Williams & Burden, 1997). In contrast, similar to psychoanalysis, drive theories emphasized internal factors as the main determinants of motivation. Drives were explained as internal forces that seek to maintain the optimal states of the organism s mechanisms. Thus, drive theories, such as that of Hull (1943), argue that human motivation is activated when actual or potential survival needs of an individual are threatened. Although these theories extended the understanding of motivation by including biological and environmental factors, they did not provide a thorough picture of the issue. In the 1960s, inspired by drive theories, humanist psychologists Maslow (1962) and Rogers (1963) formulated theories that took into account the physical, emotional, interpersonal and intellectual aspects of an individual the whole person to explain human motivation (Eggen & Kauchak, 2004). These so-called humanistic theories hypothesized that individuals ultimately seek their self-actualization, but that the

18 18 achievement of this goal depends on the fulfillment of lower and more basic needs, such as those for survival, safety and comfort (Pintrich & Schunk, 1996). Unlike psychoanalysis, behaviorism, and drive theories, humanistic theories stressed the importance of intrinsic and affective factors, such as self-esteem and desire for social acceptance, as determinants of motivation (Burden, 1995). The discussion about internal and external motivating factors became more prominent in mid-1970s with the distinction between intrinsic and extrinsic motivations (Deci, 1975). Intrinsic motivation is understood as a personal desire for selfdetermination, whereas extrinsic motivation is motivation from outside and beyond the individual (Brown, 1994; Burden, 1995). Therefore, intrinsically motivated individuals seek their internal satisfaction while extrinsically motivated individuals seek rewards. These two broad motivational categories are contextual and, although opposites in essence, they are in fact on separate continua (Eggen and Kauchak, 2004). That is to say that an individual may be motivated to perform a task both intrinsically and extrinsically. In combination, these early theories have provided insightful information to the understanding of motivation. However, taken in isolation, none of them has offered an adequate account for the issue. This is due to two main reasons. First, by emphasizing particular aspects of motivation, they fail to consider a combination of all factors, from instincts, to needs, to rewards, offering simple explanations for such a complex issue. And secondly and most notably, in stressing elements that are outside the individual s control, they downgrade the importance of cognition as part of the motivational construct (Pintrich & Schunk, 1996; Williams & Burden, 1997). This gap has been recently filled by cognitive theories, which postulate that beliefs, expectations, intentions, and thought

19 processes play a fundamental role in the individual s innate desire to understand the world (Eggen & Kauchak, 2004). 19 Motivation and educational psychology As noted earlier in this paper, the concept of motivation has evolved over the years from simple ideas that concentrated on needs and external forces outside of the individual s control to more recent, elaborated formulations that embrace both internal and external factors which may or may not be under one s control. Contemporary views of motivation involve several considerations. First, they try to explain what initiates, directs, intensifies, and sustains motivation, rather than focus on one of these aspects. These current theories also highlight the importance of cognition as part of the motivational construct and recognize that motivation involves other components such as emotions, values, attributions, and goals. Moreover, they consider individual differences, societal influences, and situation-specific factors as important motivational determinants as well (Good & Brophy, 1995). Williams and Burden s (1997) definition illustrates this current conceptualization of motivation. They state that [motivation is] a state of cognitive and motivational arousal, which leads to a conscious decision to act, and which gives rise to a period of sustained intellectual and/or physical effort in order to attain a previously set goal (or goals). 3 (p.120) 3 Williams and Burden (1997) argue that their definition reflects a social cognitive approach to motivation. However, as posited by Eggen and Kauchack (2004), the difference between cognitive and social cognitive theories can sometimes be blurred (p. 358). For this reason, in this paper, the term cognitive theory will be used to refer to both cognitive and social cognitive theories.

20 20 Williams and Burden s definition captures elements underpinning most theories of cognitive psychology. Cognitive psychology views behavior and motivation as the result of the interplay between the individual s conscious mental processes, such as thoughts and beliefs, and the environment, and most importantly, it explains how the interaction between these processes and the environment is transformed into action (Burden, 1995; Williams & Burden, 1997). Similar to the early psychological theories, some cognitive theories have not been originally or exclusively developed for application into the educational context. They have, however, been eventually used to explain students motivation (Pintrich & Schunk, 1996). Motivational cognitive theories are believed to provide better understanding about students motivation for they exploit unobservable factors that are closely related to learning (e.g.: mental processes such as interpretation). In the following, I discuss six motivational cognitive theories that have been applied in the educational context. Probably the most well-known cognitive theory is the expectancy-value theory (Eccles & Migfield, 1995). According to this theory, motivation, or achievement behavior, results from the combination of the individual s expectancy of success in performing a task with the value that the individual attributes to success on that task. The expectancy component answers the question Am I able to do this task? and is related to the beliefs that individuals have about their future expectancy for success. Here, two types of judgments influence the individual s expectancy for success: their self-concept and their perceptions of task difficulty. The value component, in contrast, answers the question Why should I do this task? and is related to the individual s goals, interests, and values. In their comprehensive model of the value construct, Eccles and Wigfield

21 21 (1995) identify four components of task value: attainment, or the importance of doing well in a task; intrinsic interest, or the pleasure experienced when doing a task; extrinsic utility, or the instrumental use of a task; and cost, or the negative aspects perceived in performing the task. Both the expectancy and the value constructs operate together and are equally important in determining one s motivation. So, if either one is low, motivation is also consequently low. Research on the expectancy and value theory has shown that expectancy of success is closely related to achievement and cognitive engagement while task value is closely related to choice behaviors that lead to future achievement (Pintrich & Schunk, 1996). In addition, educational research has indicated that students with high expectancies for success obtain higher achievements than those with low expectancies. Therefore, one implication of this theory would be that teachers should help students develop appropriate expectancies for success in order to engage them in activities and maximize their achievements (Eggen & Kauchak, 2004). Another cognitive theory that has been widely adopted in the educational context is the self-efficacy theory (Bandura, 1986). Underlying this theory is the belief that motivation depends on the individual s judgments of his/her capabilities. In other words, it is the individual s perceptions of his/her own competence that will or will not lead him/her to perform a given task. This perception is determined by four factors: past performance (e.g.: successes and failures), modeling (e.g.: observation of others modeling), verbal persuasion (e.g.: encouragement by others), and psychological state (e.g.: anxiety). At first, the concept of self-efficacy may resemble that of self-concept in the expectancy-value theory. Scholars point out, however, that the former bears more

22 22 behavioral aspects and is more situation-specific than the latter concept, which is more closely related to personality and stable beliefs (Good & Brophy, 1995; Pintrich & Schunk, 1996). The two major assumptions of the self-efficacy theory are, firstly, that individuals engage in tasks when they think they have the competence to perform them, but avoid engaging in tasks that they perceive to be beyond their capabilities; and secondly, that individuals decide on the quantity and quality of effort and willingness to perform the task based on their beliefs of how well they are able to do that. Research in the educational context has corroborated these assumptions (Pintrich & Schunk, 1996). It has shown that students with high self-efficacy usually outperform those with low-efficacy and that students with low self-efficacy tend to avoid performing tasks which they believe they are not capable of. The expectancy-value and self-efficacy theories accentuate the role of the individual s beliefs in explaining human motivation. The attribution theory (Weiner, 1992), in contrast, focuses on the causes of those beliefs. By attribution, it is meant the explanation the individual gives for his/her past experiences (successes and failures), which may or may not motivate future action. Attributions may be influenced by personal factors, such as ability and interest, and/or environmental factors, such as luck and task difficulty. Attributions are categorized into three dimensions: locus, the location of the cause (internal or external to the individual); stability, the possible change of the cause; and control, the extent to which one assumes responsibility for the cause. In general, the theory assumes that human motivation lies in the desire to understand oneself and the environment, as well the causes of one s behaviors and the behavior of others. It also

23 23 notes that since the attributions individuals make may not be accurate, they may not reflect the actual reality. Whether accurate or not, attributions affect the individual s behavior. Referring to the educational context, Eggen and Kauchak (2004) and Good and Brophy (1995) argue that attributions may influence learners emotional reactions to success and failure, their expectations of achievement, and future effort. For instance, learners who constantly experience failure may attribute this to lack of ability, an internal, uncontrolled cause, which may eventually lead to learned helplessness, the feeling that no amount of effort can lead to success (Eggen & Kauchak, 2004, p.368). Therefore, teachers must become aware of their own behavior and the behavior of students and of their feedback to students for they may influence students perceptions of failure and success (Pintrich & Schunk, 1996). Other motivational cognitive theories stress the importance of goals. Two of these theories that are especially relevant for education are goal-setting theory and goalorientation theory. Goal-setting theory (Locke & Latham, 1990) contends that it is the setting of goals which leads to action. Regardless of the nature of the goal, whether it is internal or external to the individual, it is the aspects of goal choice and goal commitment that determine the level of motivation. Goal choice refers to the goals one seeks to attain and the level at which one seeks to attain those goals (e.g. answering all questions on an exam). Goal commitment, on the other hand, refers to one s level of attachment to and enthusiasm about a goal (e.g. the time and effort devoted to studying for an exam). So, according to this theory, one s motivation seems to be at its highest when he/she is strongly committed to a deliberately chosen goal (Pintrich & Schunk, 1996). Although

24 24 goal-setting theory was primarily developed to explain task performance in business settings, it has been adopted in the education context as well. Some principles for setting goals that can be used by teachers and students involve the selection specific, immediate, and moderately challenging goals; monitoring goals; using appropriate strategies; and providing feedback that increases self-efficacy (Eggen & Kauchak, 2004; Pintrich & Schunk, 1996). Contrary to goal setting theory, goal-orientation theory (Ames, 1992; Dweck & Leggett, 1988) is concerned with the reasons for setting goals and was developed with the specific purpose to explain children s achievement behavior in schools. According to this theory, two main orientations guide individuals to engage in achievement behavior: learning (or mastery) orientation, which focuses on the understanding or mastery of a task; and performance orientation, which focuses on competence and ability. Thus, for instance, individuals that are learning-oriented are likely to engage in tasks to learn something new and to challenge themselves, whereas performance-oriented individuals are likely to engage in activities to outperform their peers. The distinction between these goal orientations is similar to the distinction between intrinsic and extrinsic motivations (Pintrich & Schunk, 1996). Goal-orientations, however, bear more cognitive aspects and contextual considerations whereas intrinsic/extrinsic orientations are more closely associated with affective factors. Research on goal orientation has reported that learning-oriented learners have higher self-efficacy, are more persistent, and attribute success to internal causes (e.g. ability). However, it has also found that learners tend to select the orientation that is encouraged in their classes (Printich & Schunk, 1996). So, in order to help students

25 25 develop more positive self-efficacy and attributions, teachers should highlight the importance of mastery goals, as opposed to performance goals, when assigning tasks, evaluating, and distributing responsibility. Finally, there are self-determination and self-worth theories. Self-determination theory (Deci & Ryan, 1985) emphasizes intrinsic motivation and autonomy. The theory asserts that individuals are intrinsically motivated to act on their environment and to exercise their autonomy (e.g.: to have choices and make decisions). Three innate psychological needs are responsible for instigating self-determining behavior: the need for competence (to function effectively in the environment), the need for control (or autonomy), and the need for relatedness (to connect with others). The application of this theory in the educational context implies, thus, that it is important for teachers to allow students to exercise their autonomy by giving them choices and decision-making powers in order to raise or enhance their motivation (Eggen & Kauchak, 2004). Self-worth theory, in contrast, highlights the need for self-acceptance (Covington, 1992). The main assumption underlying this theory is that, to maintain a positive selfimage, individuals make attributions about their competence and performance that do not downgrade their perception of personal value and worth. For instance, a student may attribute his/her low grade to the difficulty of the test instead of admitting that he/she does not know the answers. This suggests that the need for self-worth may influence the attributions one makes in a situation and stresses the importance of affective needs as determining components of motivation (Pintrich & Schunk, 1996). In the learning environment, students self-worth may be threatened by situations like competition, failure, and negative feedback (Good & Brophy, 1995). Teachers, then, should minimize

26 26 such situations by, for instance, reducing test anxiety and providing sincere feedback about students performance. Whether emphasizing the role of goals or that of attributions, motivational cognitive theories have collectively provided valuable implications for education. Through them, psychologists and educators have been able to understand the complexity of students motivation, address motivational problems in the learning setting, and build teaching practices that prioritize students motivation. Motivation and instructional design Instructional design is the field of education responsible for transforming theoretical conceptualizations and research findings into models of instruction for application in the classroom (Good & Brophy, 1995). One subdivision of instructional design involves motivation. The aim of instructional design of motivation is to develop instructional (or teaching) strategies to arouse, increase and sustain students motivation. In the following, two of the most notable instructional designs of motivation and a more recent instructional framework are described. One of the most influential approaches to motivational instruction was developed by Keller (1983). Drawing on principles from the expectancy-value theory, Keller proposes a systematic approach for designing motivating instruction. He suggests that there are four major dimensions of motivation: interest, relevance, expectancy and satisfaction. Interest refers to the extent to which the students curiosity is aroused and sustained over time. Relevance refers to whether the students perception about the

27 27 instruction is related to their personal needs and goals. Expectancy concerns the students likelihood of success through personal control. Satisfaction is associated with the students intrinsic motivation and their responses to external rewards. Based on this framework, Keller integrates numerous motivational strategies with the purpose of promoting students motivation. His strategies involve, among many other things, using anecdotes and humor to increase students curiosity and interest, assigning tasks at a moderate risk to enhance achievement-striving behavior, using techniques that offer personal control over success to increase expectancy, and giving verbal praise and informative feedback to maintain intrinsic satisfaction with instruction. Another motivational framework that has been widely adopted in the designing of motivating instructions is that of Brophy (1987, 1998). Inspired by Keller and also drawing on expectancy-value theory, Brophy has synthesized theories and research about student motivation into a number of instructional strategies for motivating students to learn. According to him, motivation to learn is different from intrinsic, enjoymentdriven motivation and from extrinsic, reinforcement-driven motivation (Brophy, 1998, p.12); it is, essentially, the cognitive engagement in learning activities from which one attempts to get the intended learning benefits. For instance, students motivated to learn engage in tasks for the purpose of gaining knowledge or skills, even if these tasks are not appealing to them. Brophy argues that without the strategies for motivation to learn the motivational picture is never complete (1998, p.199). Among his strategies to motivate students to learn are being enthusiastic, making content more personal, and inducing metacognitive awareness. A more recent instructional model of motivation is offered by Eggen and Kauchak

28 28 (2004). Based mainly on principles from self-determination, but also on self-efficacy, expectancy-value theories, Eggen and Kauchak propose a learning-oriented framework in which the focus is on learning goals rather than on performance goals. Their model is comprises four variables: self-regulated learners, teacher characteristics, climate variables, and instructional variables. The strategies concerning self-regulated learners involve, among other things, emphasizing the relationship between responsibility and learning for students so that they can exert more control over their learning. Strategies concerning teacher characteristics relate to the teacher s potential motivating qualities, such as caring and enthusiasm. Strategies concerning climate refer to establishing order, safety, success, challenge, and task comprehension. Finally, strategies concerning instruction refer to the development of interest in learning activities, such as by personalization and appropriate feedback. Eggen and Kauchak argue that these variables are interdependent, meaning that the effective application of one variable depends on that of the others as well. Works like those described above have inspired several other psychologists and educators build their own compilations of strategies for stimulating students motivation to learn. Consequently, the recent literature on the topic offers motivating instructional suggestions for a wide range of situations for achievement in school (e.g. Alderman, 2004), for classroom management and discipline (e.g. Burden, 1995, 2003), for dealing with younger learners (e.g. McInerney, 2000) and in second language classrooms (e.g. Crookes, 2003; Dörnyei, 2001a, Dörnyei & Csizér, 1998).

29 29 Motivation and second language teaching Undoubtedly, theory, research and instructional design have, together, provided insightful information about students motivation. However, many scholars have argued that this information does not directly relate to the field of second language (Crookes & Schmidt, 1991; Dörnyei, 2003; Oxford & Shearin, 1994; Williams & Burden, 1997). These scholars contend that L2 learning has a unique culturally-bound nature and for this reason it should be treated apart from other school subjects. Reisener (1992, cited in Chambers, 1999, p.8) points out at least nine aspects in which L2 teaching differs from the teaching of other school subjects. Among these distinctions are, firstly and most obviously, the channel by which instruction is delivered (classes are taught in the target language). Other differences involve the nature of the course (skill-oriented, intensive practice and process-dependent) and complexity (students have to learn another phoneme-grapheme system). In the following, I discuss how the issue of motivation has been incorporated into the field of L2 research by providing descriptions of the most wellknown motivational constructs in the field. It was not until the 1970s that the first motivational theory was specifically developed to explain students motivation to learn a second language. After a series of studies involving Canadian learners of French, socio-psychologists Gardner and Lambert (1972) proposed a theoretical framework called social-psychology theory, which explained motivation in terms of integrative-orientation and instrumental-orientation. Integrative-orientation refers to the learner's interest in identifying with, interacting with, or even becoming a member of a certain L2 community. Instrumental-orientation refers to

30 30 the learner's interest in the practical uses of a given language. Based on their interpretations of the results, Gardner and Lambert concluded that learners highly interested in the L2 community have more motivation to learn the L2 than those concerned with the instrumental use of the language. In other words, they claimed that students motivation to learn an L2 depends on their identification with the community in which the target language is spoken; the more this identification is, the higher the motivation. Although Gardner and Lambert s theory has been acknowledged as the most influential L2 motivational theory to the present date, it has received at least two strong criticisms (Brown, 1994; Crookes & Schmidt, 1991; Dörnyei, 1996a, 2003; Oxford & Shearin, 1994). First, since the studies were held only in Canada, where two official languages (English and French) are spoken, many researchers believe that attitudes toward a community within the same nation are likely to be more positive than attitudes towards an alien culture or community. In addition, they argue that the emphasis on the social dimension that perfectly explains the Canadian second language situation may not apply to other settings, namely in contexts where the L2 is taught as a foreign language. Another criticism refers to the results obtained in Canada. Further replication studies failed to corroborate Gardner and Lambert s findings (Au, 1988; Gardner, 1985; and Oller, 1981, as cited in Crookes & Schmidt, 1991). Despite the criticisms, though, sociopsychology theory remained prominent in the field of L2 research for the following twenty years. In 1991, Crookes and Schmidt proposed a review of the research on L2 motivation and encouraged a shift from the dichotomous integrative/instrumental

31 31 paradigm towards more multi-faceted classroom-based research. Their suggestion for an L2 motivational framework encompasses four dimensions. First, there is the micro level, which concerns the motivational effects on the cognitive processing of L2 stimuli, such as allocation of attention and use of learning strategies. Second, there is the classroom level, which deals with techniques and classroom activities to enhance motivation, which is the most carefully elaborated level. Drawing on Keller s (1983) motivational conceptualization (described earlier in this paper), Crookes and Schmidt discuss how preliminaries, activities, feedback, and materials can enhance motivation. The third and fourth levels concern the syllabus and extracurricular activities and long-term learning, respectively. Crookes and Schmidt s call for reopening the L2 motivation agenda gave rise to a number of constructs and empirical studies that sought to explore aspects of L2 motivation that had been overshadowed by Gardner and Lambert s socio-psychology theory. Whether based on literature or built upon empirical research, these subsequent constructs have not only proposed L2 motivation frameworks comprising factors from different psychological fields but have also suggested numerous instructional strategies to motivate language learners. One of these motivational constructs has been offered by Oxford and Shearin (1994, 1996). Drawing on motivational principles from different branches of psychology, Oxford and Shearin explore possible implications of such principles in L2 teaching. According to their synthesis, there are five general implications for L2 teachers to enhance students motivation. First, teachers should find out the reasons why students are studying the new language. These may vary considerably, from cultural curiosity to

32 32 intellectual challenge. Here, Oxfrod and Shearin argue that the main point is to provide activities that are relevant to students. Second, teachers should help with students' perceptions of failure and success. They draw attention to the important roles of goals, feedback and learning styles since they can negatively affect students perceptions. Another implication would be to show the relevance of knowing a second language nowadays. Teachers can do so by demonstrating that L2 learning can enhance their careers or be an exciting mental challenge. Teachers should also provide a motivating classroom atmosphere. Oxford and Shearin postulate that variety, relevant activities, appropriate feedback, and a certain degree of autonomy are fundamental to create an atmosphere where students are free from anxiety and other psychological negative factors. Finally, extrinsic motivational methods should be used only to help students develop their own intrinsic motivation. A suggestion to achieve this is by emphasizing mastery of goals. Intrinsic motivation, in fact, has been the focus of several other L2 motivational frameworks (Brown, 1994; Ur, 1996). Being one of the main proponents of the importance of L2 intrinsic motivation, Brown (1994), for instance, proposes a move from extrinsic motivation approaches to intrinsic motivation approaches in various dimensions, such as school curriculum, parental expectations, tests and exams. Included in his approach is a ten-question checklist for teachers for a more practical use of motivational techniques in the classroom. Among other principles, Brown encourages reflection about whether a technique is presented in a positive, enthusiastic manner, and whether students have choice in selecting some aspect of the technique or in determining how they go about fulfilling the goals of the technique.