An Investigation into the Motivation, Preferred Instructional Style, and Japanese Language Achievement of Non-Japanese-Major University Students

Transcription

1 An Investigation into the Motivation, Preferred Instructional Style, and Japanese Language Achievement of Non-Japanese-Major University Students Aya Okamoto ( 岡本綾 )* 1 Abstract This article reports on a case study of the relationship among language learning motivations, instruction factors and second foreign language (L2) achievement in Japanese non-major undergraduate courses in Hsuan Chang University (HCU) in Taiwan. A questionnaire based on L2 self framework (Dörnyei, 2005) was completed by 82 students who took an optional course in Japanese language, at the end of their programme of study. The results indicated that two major motivations for learning Japanese were travel and instrumental (carrier). Furthermore, a simultaneous multiple regression analysis suggested that travel orientation may predict higher examination scores. There was a weak significant correlation between students examination scores and their preferred instruction type. 1. Introduction Learning a foreign language usually requires long periods of continuous effort; therefore (aside from biological factors such as age of onset) motivation, following aptitude, has been identified one of the most reliable predictors of individual differences in L2 success (Dörnyei & Skehan, 2003). Thus it is helpful indeed almost essential for language teachers to be aware of the reasons why their students want to learn a foreign language, in order to design a suitable curriculum, syllabus and teaching materials capable of sustaining their motivation, and thus potentially reducing the dropout rate and increasing their level of success. I would like to thank the anonymous reviewers for their constructive suggestions to improve the paper. Remaining errors are, of course, my own responsibility. *Assistant Professor of Department of Applied Foreign Languages of Hsuan Chuang University

2 Research into L2 motivation has concentrated on L2 English, naturally due to its status as the lingua franca of our globalizing era. Consequently, motivation research into other L2s, including Japanese, has been scarce. This situation is certainly unsatisfactory for Taiwan, where Japanese is most popular second foreign language other than English. According to a survey by Taiwan s Ministry of Education (MOE), 412 out of 560 (that is, about 75%) second foreign language classes in over 100 high schools were Japanese classes (Taiwan today 2004). As for higher education, a survey reports that the total number of L2 Japanese learners in 2006 in Taiwan is 118,541, and that 86.8% of them, or 100,403, are non-major learners (Interchange Association, Japan 2007). This number is quite remarkable given the size of the country 2. The most common reason for learning Japanese in Taiwan is consistent across both high school and university levels: interest in Japanese culture (e.g., pop culture, comic books and anime), followed by interest in the language itself. A similar trend of L2 Japanese motivation was also observed for Japanese majors at university (Horikoshi 2007). This makes for a clear contrast with non-major university students motivation for learning English. Warden and Lin (2000), who surveyed over 2,000 university students in Taiwan, reported that in learning English, students placed high value on instrumentally-oriented motives (e.g., carrier improvement) rather than cultural ones. A recent study which investigated the relationship between motivation and L2 Japanese achievement in L2 Japanese majors at university, reported a weak positive significant correlation between culturally-oriented motivations (especially interest in Japan s pop subcultures) and L2 Japanese success (Horikoshi 2010). The current study further investigates an instructional variable and its relationship to L2 achievement. As it has been pointed out by Crookes & Schmidt (1991), studies that only focus on the relationship between individual difference and language achievement often overlook the importance of the teacher s role in the learning process. Given these previous findings in the Taiwan context, this study attempts to identify the following: 2 Almost 50,000 learners in Taiwan took the JLPT in 2006.

3 1. The motivation type of university students who take Japanese as non-major L2. 2. The relationship between the motivation type and L2 achievement. 3. The relationship between preferred instructional style and L2 achievement. 4. The gender effect on 1 and 3 above. 2. Target Japanese courses This study targeted all the Japanese language courses taught in the Department of Applied Foreign Language in Hsuan Chuang University (HCU) from September 2009 to June Since all Japanese courses in the department are optional, they are also open to non-language majors, such as history or accounting students. Figure 1 shows the number of students in each course, and summarizes the total number of students for the five Japanese courses in the school year Japanese 1 is for absolute beginners with no prior knowledge of the language, and the level of the follow-up courses gradually increases over two years. Currently, Japanese 4 is the highest level offered in HCU, yet its level is still elementary. Intermediate levels have not been offered at HCU due to insufficient enrolment Men 25% 28 Women 75% JPN1 JPN2-D JPN3 JPN4 JPN2-N 12 course N Percent JPN JPN2-D JPN JPN JPN2-N Total Figure 1. Total number of students in each Japanese course ( ) *JPN=JAPANESE, D= DAY COURSE, N= NIGHT COURSE Table 1 below provides the curriculum of core Japanese courses in HCU, with reference to the Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR) and Japanese

4 Language Placement Test (JLPT). Each semester the school offers two Japanese courses: either Japanese 1 and Japanese 3, or Japanese 2 and Japanese 4. Completion of a lower level of course is not a prerequisite to join higher level course, as long as students pass an entrance test. Year 1 Year 2 1 st semester 2 nd semester 1 st semester 2nd semester Course title Japanese 1 Japanese 2 Japanese 3 Japanese 4 Learning hours 32 hours 32 hours 32 hours 32 hours Level Pre-Beginner Beginner Elementary CEFR A1 A2 JLPT 3 n/a N5 Table 1. Japanese core courses curriculum in HCU (2010) Lessons were two hours per week, and provided students with essential knowledge of basic grammar, Japanese writing systems, vocabulary and survival conversational expressions, and so on. Since the students were beginners, each lesson was carefully planned within the framework of the PPP (Presentation, Practice and Production) approach, 4 with rich visual and audio materials. Cultural information, such as Japanese tradition and customs which are related to the topic of the lesson, was also provided by means of videos. The instructor was a native Japanese speaker (the author) and a Taiwanese teaching assistant with JLPT N1 who level attended each lesson in order to help the students. Students were requested to access E-learning in order to download homework provided either in PDF files or MP3 files (for listening assignments), and were also encouraged to use online learning materials for self-study. 3 The Japanese Language Proficiency Test ( 日本語能力試験 ), a standardized criterion-referenced test designed to evaluate and certify the Japanese language proficiency of non-native speakers. Administered since 1984, the JLPT has been recently revised, and the first revised version will be administered in December The revised test will consist of five levels: N1, N2, N3, N4, and N5, with N1 being the highest level and N5 the easiest. 4 The 3Ps approach is often criticized as encouraging excessive control by the teacher. Nevertheless the 3Ps based method is the most common approach for communicative language teaching (Skehan, 1998;94).

5 3. E-learning: Online self-study materials HCU has been promoting the use of the E-learning system, encouraging teachers to upload more digitalized course materials. Students are also expected to access the system and utilize available online materials to support and facilitate their learning. Teachers can upload various types of digital files, and observe each student s access record (e.g., which page is accessed, and how many times, and for how long). In addition to various types of ready-made E-learning materials provided by the Japan Foundation ( the author / instructor developed two types of online self-practice materials to specifically fit the school textbooks, 5 and these were accessible via E-learning Vocabulary self-practice visual materials New vocabulary in the Japanese courses was always introduced with picture slides. The consideration behind this is as follows: some Chinese and Japanese terms share the same characters, although they may differ in their pronunciation. According to some researchers, L1 Chinese speakers suffer from low listening comprehension due to negatively transferred L1 pronunciation in other words, they persist in reading Japanese words with Chinese pronunciation (e.g., Komori 2005; Chiu 2006). In order to avoid this L1 transfer, any textual cues, such as the presentation of Chinese word-equivalents, was avoided when Japanese words were introduced for the first time. All picture cues have been digitalized and were used in class as Power Point slides. In order to provide students with more self-study opportunities, the PPT files were further converted into flash via a webpage ( HandOuts is a presentation-sharing website where users can upload, view and share presentation files online. The PPT files used in each lesson were uploaded onto university s E-learning system for all Japanese courses. Students can view the online slides freely online, and practice the vocabulary with visual stimuli. 5 大家的日本語 I and II( 大新書局 ): Japanese for everyone. This series of textbooks has been a best-seller in Japan, and the translated version has been widely used in Taiwan. The related materials for the series have been translated into English, Chinese, Spanish, Portuguese, French, Russian, Thai and Vietnamese.

6 3.2. MP3 listening practice material with flash audio player The textbook provides a vocabulary list and target sentences as well as model dialogues. During each lesson, students had many opportunities to hear how words are pronounced, as the instructor is a native Japanese speaker. Nevertheless, two class hours per week was far from ideal for beginners to get used to the sounds of Japanese. Therefore the webpage which provides students with self-access listening material for the entire lessons was developed. In order to encourage students to make use of more online listening material, all MP3 were embedded in a flash audio player program so that students do not need to download the MP3 file in order to play it. Instead they can simply click the play button, and the file will immediately play online. 4. Questionnaire design and theoretical framework The aim of this survey was threefold: first, to receive feedback on the courses based on general student satisfaction; second, to investigate their preference in regards to language learning/teaching style; and third, to identify the factors which had motivated them to enrol in the Japanese language course. Questionnaire design The questionnaire was divided into the following three sections. Section 1 Section 2 Section 3 Main questionnaire Previous Japanese learning history Course satisfaction Motivation for learning Japanese Preferred teaching methods Section 3, which was the main focus of this study, consisted of 66 questions based on the 9 factors selected and validated according to Dörnyei s (2005) L2 Motivational Self System Motivation as a social psychological factor in L2 learning One of the biggest theoretical challenges in the L2 motivation field is a

7 conceptualization of the target of the investigation that is, defining and capturing the exact nature of motivation which should allow the degree of L2 motivation to be measured. In the past two decades, conceptualization of language learning motivation in L2 literature has undergone rapid development from the socio-educational mode of Gardner et al. (1972; 1985) to many alternatives: motivation from process-oriented perspective (Ushioda, 1996), the neurobiological basis of motivation (Schumann, 2001), L2 motivation and self-determination theory (SDT: Deci and Ryan, 1985, Noels et al., 2003) and task motivation (Tremblay and Gardner, 1995). The current survey was designed according to the framework of a socio-cultural motivation approach, by integrating the self framework coined by Dörnyei (2005) because the primary research goal lay in identification of the potential impact of social factors, such as the geographical and cultural relationship between Taiwan and Japan onto L2 Japanese learning motivation. The most well-known and accepted theoretical concept of motivation in this framework is integrative/instrumental duality as defined by Gardner and Lambert (1972), which is grounded in social psychology. Instrumental motivation refers to language learning for the sake of material gains (e.g. a better job), while integrative motivation reflects a sincere and personal interest in the people and culture represented by the other group" (ibid.: 132). Gardner and his colleagues conducted their research primarily in a Canadian bilingual context, and claimed that integrative motivation is a better predictor of L2 success than instrumental motivation (Gardner & MacIntyre, 1992). However their conclusion has been criticized on the grounds that their research context was too unique (since language is such a political issue in Canada), and therefore its findings cannot be applied globally. For instance, one of the definitions of integrative motivation in Gardner and Lambert is that one must be willing to identify with members of another ethnolinguistic group and take on very subtle aspects of their behavior (ibid: 135). However, this can be quite unrealistic, and does not make much sense for L2 language learners for whom there is no specific target group of L2 speakers (e.g., EFL learners). As an alternative integrative concept in the general context of L2 learning, Dörnyei

8 (2005) has proposed a new L2 motivation construct, the L2 Motivation Self System, which is composed of three dimensions: the ideal L2 self, the ought-to self, and the L2 learning experience. The ideal L2 self refers to the vision of oneself in the future, more specifically, the representation of the attribute that someone would ideally like to possess (i.e., representation of hopes, aspiration, or wishes) (Dörnyei & Ushioda, 2009:13). The ought-to self refers to an attribute that one believes one ought to possess (i.e., a representation of someone else s sense of duty, obligation or responsibilities) (ibid: 13). Dörnyei (2005) hypothesizes that human psychology tries to reduce the discrepancy between our current and possible future salves, and if the proficiency in the target language is part of one s ideal or ought-to self, this will serve as a powerful motivation to learn the language. 5. Materials and Methods 5.1. Design and procedure The following Table 2 shows all tested items according to the motivation and L2 learning preference variables. Since Japanese language courses are not obligatory, the ought-to self factor was unsuitable in this context (i.e., unlike English, which is almost unavoidable in higher education) and therefore not included. Consequently, nine factors were selected for motivational study, and three factors were selected for L2 learning preference study, respectively. The items used in measuring motivation were adopted from previous studies conducted in the L2 Motivation Self System framework (Dörnyei 2005; Taguchi et al., 2009; Ryan 2009). Some items regarding the L2 learning preference were adopted from Itai (2001) who has conducted a motivation and learning / teaching belief survey on L2 Japanese among university students in Hong Kong. For each variable, five items have been selected, omitting the two variables, communicative language teaching and traditional teacher centred approach," to which eight tokens were given instead. The questionnaire adopted statement-type and question-type items; both types were measured by six-point Likert scales with the following anchor: (1) totally disagree, (2) disagree, (3) rather disagree, (4) rather agree, (5) agree and (6) totally agree (see

9 Appendix A). Factor name Item number Cronbach s α Motivation variables 1. Intended learning effort 10*, 17*, 35, 47, Ideal L2 self 13, 20, 33, 43, Self confidence 3, 52, 62, 46, Instrumental- promotion 41, 23, 60, 58, Cultural interests 57, 27, 65, 9, 21, Attitude to Japan and Japanese 15, 56, 22*, Integrativeness to native Japanese 66, 6, 31, Travel orientation 59, 45, 19, 37, 26* Integrativeness to other L2 Japanese learners 2, 11, 48, 12*, L2 learning style preference variables 1. E-learning 25, 55*, 40, 39, Communicative language teaching , 20, 61, 51, 5, Traditional teacher-centered approach 8, 16, 14, 36, 24, 4, Table 2. Composition of variables with reliability coefficients *negatively worded items The questionnaire was initially formulated in Japanese, and then later translated into Chinese by a Chinese student who had lived in Japan for two years to learn the language and obtained JLPT N1 level. Later all items were randomized. The asterisks in Table 2 represent negatively worded items (e.g., I am not interested in visiting in Japan) which require reverse coding in the data entry (i.e., for instance response 6 should be coded as 1 in the data entry). They were randomly included in order to avoid a response bias on the questionnaire. The total number of questionnaire items regarding the main survey was 66. Factor nos. 6 and 7 in the motivation variables, and factor nos.1and 3 in the L2 learning preference variables, exhibited low alpha, thus one item was dropped from the each factor in order to increase reliability. Printed questionnaires in Chinese were distributed during Japanese language classes, and students were asked to go through all the questions. In order to gain more honest

10 (and thus more reliable) responses, it is normally better to make the questionnaire anonymous. However, the obvious disadvantage of an anonymous questionnaire is that it is difficult to see the possible correlation between their answers and other factors such as test scores. Therefore, the researcher decided to ask the participants to provide their student IDs, hoping that this would somehow seem less personal than asking them to provide their names. The questionnaire was not timed, and all students completed it during break time Participants Originally, the participants in this study were to be the 206 undergraduate students taking HCU Japanese language courses during (see Figure 1). However the project commenced in the 1st semester of 2009, and audio-visual teaching materials were gradually developed during these three months, so the students who attended 1st semester courses (Japanese1 and 3) could only partially experience the new materials. For this reason, they were excluded from subsequent course satisfaction survey. The total number of participants under consideration was 92, including two students auditing the evening course. All of them were requested to answer the questionnaire and return it to the instructor. The total recovery rate of the questionnaire was 92%. The details of the participants are provided in Table 3. JPN2-D JPN2-N JPN 4 Total N 50 14* Recovered items Recovery rate 94% 86% 93% 92% Table 3. *inducing two auditing students Number of participants and the recovery rate of the questionnaire The missing data was due to students who had either already dropped out of the course, or were simply absent on the day the questionnaire was administered. None of the participants had lived in Japan before. A few of them had previously learned Japanese in high school, cram schools or informal private tutorials. Roughly speaking, 70 % of the

11 participants had no previous learning experience before joining an HCU Japanese course. 6. Results 6.1. Motivation for learning Japanese The collected data was analysed with SPSS (Version 17). Figure 2 below depicts the mean responses to the nine motivational variables (see Table 2) from the three groups. The correlation matrix of the nine motivation variable is provided in the Appendix C. The most positively rated factor was travel orientation, followed by instrumental promotion, which suggests that the students in HCU Japanese courses learn the language for practical reasons such as traveling in Japan, or finding better jobs. Yet, all groups show low confidence in learning Japanese. Figure 2. Mean responses to L2 Japanese learning motivation factors There was a significant effect of the type of factor (F =31.657, p<0.001), although there was no significant interaction effect between the group and the type of factor (F =0.136, p=0.873), which suggest that in general, students in three groups responded to each question in a similar manner (see Appendix B). The interaction between gender and the type of factor was not significant (F =1.573, p=0.129).

12 6.2. Motivation/instruction and exam scores In order to investigate whether gaining high scores in examination was predicted by any of the 9 motivation variables and 3 instructional variable (traditional, communicative, E-learning), a simultaneous multiple regression was conducted with the 12 variables as predictors, and examination scores as the outcome variable. A marginally significant result was found only with travel orientation (β=0.331, p=0.47). No other variables were significant as predictors Preference with regard to L2 teaching and achievement Comparison among the classes The data was submitted to a two-way mixed ANOVA with teaching method (communicative or traditional) as a within-subject factor and class (three levels) as a between-subject factor. All groups show their preference with regard to communicative language teaching to the traditional one (F=27.775, p<0.001, partial η 2 =0.26). Figure 3. Preference of two different teaching methods by three groups Among the three groups, JPN2-N (night course) exhibits the strongest preference for communicative teaching, while JPN2-D (day course), a group of almost the same proficiency level with JPN2-N, exhibits the least preference for the same teaching method. Figure 3 indicates a possible weak interaction between class types (i.e.

13 proficiency) and language teaching method, yet the interaction between the two factors was not significant (F=1.506, p=0.228, partial η 2 =0.37). In order to investigate a possible relationship between learners scores on the examinations in each class, and their preference to teaching method, the average of midterm and final examination scores and mean responses to the two language teaching methods were plotted. Figure 4. CLL preferences against midterm scores Figure 5. TLL preferences against final exam scores There was a weak significant correlation between students examination scores and their preferred language teaching method. As Figure 4 and 5 indicate, while students who scored higher in the examinations rated communicative language teaching positively (r=0.231, n=83, p=0.036, two-tailed), students who scored poorly rated traditional language teaching method positively (r=-0.271, n=83, p=0.013, two-tailed) Comparison between high and low scored learners Although class (i.e. proficiency level) was not found to have a significant effect on the preferred language teaching method, a significant correlation between exam scores and preferred language teaching method was detected. Therefore the data was divided

14 into two groups of high (n=41) and low (n=41) scored learners (t= , df=80, two tailed p<0.001) 6 and submitted to two way mixed ANOVA with teaching method (communicative or traditional) as a within-subject factor and learner types (high scored or low scores) and gender (male or female) as between-subject factors. A significant main effect of teaching type (F=30.422, p<0.001, partial η 2 =0.281) as well as learners type by teaching type interaction (F=4.289, p=0.015, partial η 2 =0.73) were detected. Teaching method by gender interaction was not significant (F=2.714, p=0.103, partial η 2 =0.34) and interaction among teaching method, gender and learner type was not significant either (F=0.679, p=0.412, partial η 2 =0.009). This suggests that both types of learners, regardless of gender, preferred communicative over traditional instruction, and this tendency was stronger among higher-scoring learners. Figure 6. CLL preferences against midterm E-learning There was a weak significant correlation between E-learning and preferred teaching method. Students who prefer communicative language teaching rated E-learning positively (r=0.289, n=82, p=0.009, two-tailed), while students who prefer traditional teaching method rated E-learning negatively (r=-0.251, n=82, p=0.023, two-tailed). However, there was no significant correlation between positive attitude toward 6 There was no gender effect on the exam scores (t=-1.443, df=80, two tailed p=0.153).

15 E-learning and examination scores (r=0.024, n=82, p=0.829, two-tailed). Figure 7. CLL preferences against E-learning Figure 8. TLL preferences against E-learning 7. Summary and implications This study attempted to investigate undergraduate non-majors orientation toward learning Japanese as a foreign language. The research goals are repeated below. 1. The motivation type of university students who take Japanese as non-major L2. 2. The relationship between the motivation type and L2 achievement. 3. The relationship between preferred teaching method and L2 achievement. 4. The gender effect on 1 and 3 above. Statistical analysis revealed that students goals in learning Japanese were rather practical: travel and instrumental (carrier), which were different from the one identified for Japanese major (namely interest in Japan s pop subculture). A simultaneous multiple regression analysis suggested that travel orientation may predict higher examination scores. As for the instructional factor, although proficiency level (i.e., class type) did not have any effect on it, there was a weak significant correlation between students examination scores and their preferred instruction type; students who scored higher in examinations had a more positive opinion about the communicative type of instruction,

16 which may require more challenging activities. Preferred instruction type was also related to whether students liked self-study via E-learning; students who preferred communicative language teaching rated E-learning positively, while students who preferred traditional teaching methods rated E-learning negatively. Finally, gender did not have any effects on any of the relationships investigated in this study. The findings of this study suggest a potential cause of the current problem facing Japanese courses at HCU. As Figure 1 indicates, the number of students who continue to learn Japanese in more advanced classes drastically decreases. The low retention rate, of course, might largely be due to student-centered factors, such as lack of effort or poor learning strategies; yet it could also be due to a mismatch between students needs and teaching materials and instruction style. Currently, a textbook with a structured syllabus whose aim is to provide learners with a solid foundation of Japanese, is selected because of its popularity and availability in Taiwan. However, this choice may require reconsideration, since the current study indicates that non-major students at HCU are interested in more practical and survival type of Japanese; therefore a carefully-organized, step-by-step structure with focused instruction could de-motivate some learners, because it may not be directly relevant to their study goals. Unlike other internal factors on the part of learners, such as aptitude, L2 motivation can be enhanced by proper instruction and materials: Motivation is the property of the learners, but it is also a transitive concept (McDonough, 2007:369). According to Keller s ARCS Model of Motivational Design (1983), there are four steps for promoting and sustaining motivation in the learning process: Attention, Relevance, Confidence, Satisfaction (ARCS). The second step, relevance is defined by Keller as a perception of whether the content or instructional activities satisfy learners personal needs and goals. The results of this study indicate that current Japanese course materials may fail to increase learner s motivation, so further needs-analysis will be required.

17 有點不認同完全認同有點認同全不認同不認同認同Appendices A. Questionnaire 完1. 我喜歡具有挑戰性的教材, 因為可以使本身的日語更加進歩 大學裡應該要組成日語學習同好會 對我來說, 學習日語是件很容易的事 上小班制的話, 會時常反覆進行對話 所以跟小班制比起來, 大班制反而比較輕鬆 我覺得日語課的人數到 3 40 人的話太多了, 沒辦法達到會話練習的效果 我想要有日本人的朋友 比起用網路上的線上語音教材, 我更喜歡用課本及 CD 的教材 因為比較喜歡坐著聽課的方式上課, 對於由老師要求同學進行對話的上課方式感覺不適合自己 你喜歡日本流行樂或歌手嗎? 我對日語檢定考試沒有興趣 想跟玄奘大學其他科系裡, 有在學日文的同學多彼此認識交流 對於去認識其他同樣在學習日語的人沒有太大的興趣 說到以後, 學會日語對自己來說是非常重要的 我想學習文法或會話上的知識, 所以在課堂上介紹日本文化是在浪費時間 日本人給我感覺很容易親近 我覺得老師在文法上有加強註解說明的時候, 可以提升日語的學習效果 對我來說, 學日語只是興趣, 即使不用學得太專精也沒關係 我覺得有會話測驗的話會更好 因為學完日語去日本就會很方便, 所以才學日語 對於自己將來想從事的工作來說, 日語是必要的 我對日本傳統技藝很感興趣 我覺得日本人比台灣人還冷淡 如果能說一口的流利日語, 在台灣社會各階層裡的身分地位也能得以提升 若課程是以會話練習為主的話, 會變得很不安 我想多使用一些透過電腦學習的教材 我對去日本旅行沒有興趣 你喜歡日本藝人嗎? 我想變成像日本人那樣子的感覺

18 29. 我喜歡分組配對的教學方式 我喜歡活潑融洽, 全體又能積極參與的課程 我想要多加了解日本人 希望能常有定期舉辦關於日本或日本文化之類的相關活動 可以想像的到自己在日本跟日本人對話的情境 我覺得日本是個很發達的國家 我要把日語學到最好的程度 若是在課堂上必須主動地回答問題的話會覺得不知所措 要是去日本旅行的話, 一定要講看看已經學會的日語 若跟日本人發生誤會的話會覺得很不舒服 我常使用 E-learning 的語音教材 我覺得日語課的 E-learning 對日語學習很有幫助 如果會說日語的話, 會讓人覺得很厲害而受到尊敬崇拜 若是多了會話測驗, 會覺得很討厭 提到將來的終身職業, 就能想像到用日語在工作的自己 將來可能繼續進修專業日語, 所以現在的日語基礎很重要 因為我想去日本旅行, 所以學日語對我來說很重要 我常覺得同學們的日語說得比我還要好 若可以的話, 打算日語一直學下去 希望有更多機會可以跟老師或者高階的日語前輩認識交流 所謂教學計劃, 應該以提升學生的語言溝通能力為主 我喜歡以老師發問為主, 而學生回答問題這樣的教學方式 我覺得能透過學習來瞭解日本文化的課程比較好 我覺得我的日語學的很好 我覺得日語的發音感覺很棒 我願意花上大量的時間去學日語 每次學習時都要連上 E-learning 覺得很麻煩 我喜歡日本 你喜歡日劇跟日本電影嗎? 如果日語能力提升的話, 將來相對於一些經濟上的利益也較容易獲得 你想去日本旅行嗎? 如果能說一口的流利日語, 將來想找工作也不是件難事吧 我喜歡帶有遊戲或角色扮演的課程

19 B. Mean responses to L2 Japanese learning motivation factors by group C. Correlation matrix of the nine motivation variables L-effort L2-self Self conf. Inst. Culture Attitude Integrative Int. to other Travel L-effort 1.753**.466**.560**.555**.400**.726**.661**.588** L2-self.753** 1.332** **.447**.716**.640**.620** Self conf..466**.332** *.309**.145** Inst..560**.667** **.401**.530**.598**.555** Culture.555**.566** ** 1.407**.619**.499**.461** Attitude.400**.447** ** 1.506**.455**.486** Integrative.726**.716**.241*.530**.619**.506** 1.668**.661** Int. to other.661**.640**.309**.598**.499**.455**.668** 1.587** Travel.588**.620** **.461**.486**.661**.587** 1

20 References Crookes, G., & Schmidt, R. W. (1991). Motivation: Reopening the Research Agenda. Language Learning, 41, Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determinaton in human behaviour. New York: Pienum. Dornyei, Z., & Ushioda, Ema. (2009). Motivation, Language Identity and the L2 Self. In E. Z. Dornyei & Ema Ushioda (Eds.), Motivation, Langauge identity and L2 Self (pp. 1-8). Multilingual Matters. Dörnyei, Z. (2005). The Psychology of the Language Learner: Individual Differences in Second Language Acquisition. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Dörnyei, Z., & Skehan, P. (2003). Individual differences in second language learning. In C. D. & J. Williams (Ed.), The handbook of second language acquisition (pp ). Malden, MA and Oxford, UK: Blackwell. Gardner, R. C., & Lambert, W. E. (1972). Attitudes and motivation in second language learning. Rowley, MA: Newbury House Publishers. Gardner, R. C., & MacIntyre, P. D. (1992). A studentʼs contributions to second language learning. Part I: Cognitive variables. Language Teaching, 25, Keller, J. M. (1983). Motivational design of instruction. In R. C. M. (Ed.), Instructional-design theories and models: An overview of their current status. (pp ). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. McDonough, S. (2007). Motivation in ELT. ELT Journal, 61, Noels, K. a, Pelletier, L. G., Clément, R., & Vallerand, R. J. (2003). Why Are You Learning a Second Language? Motivational Orientations and Self-Determination Theory. Language Learning, 53, Schumann, J. H. (2001). Learning as foraging. In Z. Dornyei & R. Schmidt (Eds.), Motivation and second language acquisition (pp ). Honolulu: University of Hawai i, Second Language Teaching and Curriculum Center. Skehan, P. (1998). A cognitive approach to language learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

21 Tremblay, P. F., & Gardner, R. C. (1995). Expanding the motivation construct in language learning. Modern Language Journal, 79, Ushioda, E. (1996). Developing a dynamic concept of L2 motivation. In T. Hickey & J. Williams (Eds.), Language, Education and Society in a Changing World (pp ). Dublin/Clevedon: IRAAL/Multilingual Matters. Warden, C. A., & Lin, H. J. (2000). Existence of integrative motivation in an Asian EFL setting. Foreign Language Annals, 33, Taiwan Today (2004) retrieved March 板井美佐. (2001). 香港における中国人学習者の日本語学習に対する動機 (BF) 学習 ST 及び学習活動上の好みに関する調査 : 香港 4 大学機関の調査から. 筑波大学留学生センター日本語教育論集, (16), 交流協会 教育部 (2007)2006 年度台湾における日本語教育事情調査報告書小森和子. (2005). 第二言語としての日本語の文章理解における第一言語の単語認知処理方略の転移 - 視覚入力と聴覚入力の相違を中心に-. 横浜国立大学留学生センター紀要, 12, 邱兪瑗. (2006). 台湾人日本語学習者における日本語単語の聴覚的認知 日本語文の意味判断課題を用いた検討. 広島大学大学院教育学研究科紀要, 55( 第二部 ), 堀越和男. (2007). 日本語学習の動機付けとその成果 台湾の大学で日本語を専攻する学習者を対象に. 台大日本語文研究, 14, 堀越和男. (2010). 動機づけと学習ストラテジーが学習成果に与える影響 台湾の日本語学科で学ぶ学習者を対象に-. 台湾日本語習得研究国際シンポジウム予稿集 (pp ).

22 探討非日語系大學生的學習動機 偏好的教學模式及日語學習成效之間的關連性 岡本綾 * 本個案研究報告旨在探討台灣玄奘大學非日語系學生的語言學習動機 教學因素及第二外語學習成效之間的關連性 82 位選修日語課的大學生於學期末填寫一份以第二語言的自我結構為基礎所發展出的問卷, 問卷分析的結果顯示學習日語的二種主要動機為旅行相關以及工具性 ( 工作 ) 再者, 同步多元迴歸分析顯示旅行取向的動機能預測出較高的考試成績, 學生的考試成績與他們偏好的教學模式之間的相關顯著性較為薄弱 關鍵詞 : 學習動機, 日語課程, 教學模式, 數位學習, 成就 * 玄奘大學應用外国語學系助理教授