6TH International Congress on Technology - Engineering - Kuala Lumpur3 - Malaysia (2018-07-19)

The Relationship Between Attitudes And Motivation In Efl Context

Motivation plays a crucial role in any learning task. It influences our choices of what to learn, our continuation at doing a task, and the effort expended towards achieving a goal (Pintrich & Schunk, 2002). However, Gardner (2001a) maintains that L2 learning motivation is affected by other socio-psychological factors including attitudes. Motivation in Gardner’s (2001a) socio-educational model is supported by the variables Integrativeness and Attitudes toward the learning situation all of which together as a complex of goal-directed, attitudinal, and motivational characteristics form an integrative motive to enhance language learning. Hence, the aim of this investigation was to examine the effect of attitudes on L2 motivation of 240 intermediate Iranian EFL learners. To collect data the Attitude Motivation Test Battery [AMTB] was given to the participants. The data were analyzed through the SEM (Structural Equation Modeling) research method. The results showed that students’ attitudes had a significant positive effect on their motivation. 1. Introduction Gardner (2001a: 1) asserted research should focus on ’’individual difference characteristics of the student’’ including motivation and attitudes. As stated by Hsieh (2008), successful foreign language learning is more than just being exposed to the target language or taking language courses. Gardner (2001a) concurs as many of the variables influencing L2 learning ’’are dependent on motivation for their effects to be realized’’ (Gardner, 2001a: 2). L2 learning motivation requires three components (Gardner, 2001a). First, the motivated individuals attempt to learn the target language. Second, they want to reach the goal. Third, they will enjoy and love language learning task. These three elements are necessary to recognize more motivated from less motivated individuals; however, each component, by itself, is not sufficient to show motivation. In other words, the motivated individual shows all three components simultaneously when learning the new language. As stated by Gardner (2001a, 2007) providing a simple definition for motivation is impossible because it is a very complex and multifaceted construct. Similar propositions have been given by researchers like Csizer and Dornyei (2005). Therefore, describing motivation in simple and clear terms seems complex and different definitions have been given for the term motivation (Gholami, Allahyar, & Rafik-Galea, 2012). Results of studies in the area of motivation in general and second language (SL) or foreign language (FL) learning in particular have very often produced perplexed relationships and ambiguous findings that complicate the understanding of SL/FL motivation. These discrepancies all seem to lie in the fact that each theory defines and uses the same terms in a rather different fashion. A comparison between the definitions provided by psychologists and second language teaching specialists show that both groups share views on the multiplicity of factors motivating students. In other words, theorists and researchers from both fields believe that motivation is a multi factorial entity not a single one and is usually originated by a number of causes. However, these causes seem to be identified differently by psychologists and L2 experts. While the former recognize these sources to be intrinsic satisfaction, extrinsic reward or a combination of both (Deci and Ryan 1985), the latter consider them to be related to integrative or instrumental purposes (Gardner 1985). Although the traditional view of L2 motivation dominated the field of second/foreign language learning for a long time, new dimensions have been recently added to the concept by other researchers. In this study, Gardner’s (2001a, 2007) definition of motivation has been adopted. He stated that motivated individuals are: goal-directed, they make effort in achieving their aim, they are persistent and attendant to the tasks as are required to attain the aims, they strongly desire to achieve the goals and enjoy the activities and tasks that are required to accomplish the goals (Gardner, 2001a, 2007, 2010). As noted by Dornyei (2005) the pioneers who showed the effect of motivation on L2 success were Gardner and his associates. Gardner first showed the effect of motivation on L2 success in 1959. Indeed, Gardner and Lambert have blazed the trail in second language motivation research by investigating the impact of social variables on L2 learners since 1972. The work of these researchers ’’has laid the foundation stone for a large body of research’’ (Ghazvini & Khajehpour, 2011). Based on these original studies, Gardner developed the socio-educational model of L2 motivation in 1985 and revised it in 2001 (Gardner, 2001a). The significantly high positive relationship between attitudes toward the learning situation i.e. ’’attitudes toward any aspect of the situation in which the language is learned’’ (p.8), such as the course in general, the teacher, one’s classmates, extra-curricular activities, the course materials, etc. and Integrativeness i.e. a real interest in learning L2 to ’’come closer psychologically to the other language community’’ (Gardner, 2001a: 7), has been shown in different studies (e.g., Bernaus & Gardner, 2008; Gardner, 2001a, 2007). Therefore, it would be expected that persons with high levels of integrativeness and those who are fond of learning the target language to become identified and integrated with another language community and culture possess a positive view toward language learning situation and vice versa. Gardner (1985) claimed that integrative orientation can be regarded as the primary factor determining learning behaviors and actual achievement. Gardner (1985) considered integrative and instrumental orientations as important factors that account for starting learning behaviors and supporting motivation. He stated that this orientation stemmed from a learner’s desire to learn L2 based on a positive attitude toward the target language community and the willingness to exchange information and ideas with its speakers. Instrumental orientation showed a student’s willingness to learn the L2 for certain pragmatic goals like external rewards, course credit, passing examination or job promotion (Gardner, 1985). These two positions led to learners’ motivation to start actions in learning L2. Gardner attested that it was more desirable for students to take an integrative orientation since those who assumed and adopted the cultural and social features (e.g., cultural values, attitudes, and beliefs) of the second language were more likely to answer positively in their, feelings, thoughts and actions. These responses in turn resulted in more successful and efficient L2 learning outcomes. In other words, learners’ motivation and achievement in an L2 can be predicted by their attitudes (Gardner, 2001a). Gardner (2001b) also demonstrated that instrumental variables are not certain supports for motivation and only might lead to motivation (Gardner, 2001b: 7). These variables were instead classified as one of the “other support” factors. Moreover, Gardner and MacIntyre (1993: 188) contended that the instrumental orientation was “both conceptually and empirically…quite diverse” and that it was the least internally consistent factor among all the measures. Gardner, however, has since moderated his initial position about the superiority of integrative factors over instrumental ones. Gardner and MacIntyre (1991), illustrated that to measure instrumental motivation, researchers must “establish a situation in which such motivation will be salient” (p. 59). As regarded by Ghazvini and Khajehpour (2011), such integrative or instrumental dichotomy is at the goal/orientation level and hence ’’is not part of the core motivation component’’ (p: 1210). Gardner (2001b) has also proposed a high positive correlation between instrumental and integrative orientations, revealing that “neither class of reasons is mutually independent” (p. 15). Gardner and Lambert (1972) focused on integrative orientation. Since then Gardner and his colleagues have modified and extended the terminology of the socio-educational model. They have asserted that the word indicating this particular view in the model is ’’Integrativeness’’, which Gardner (2001a, 2010) described as actual interest in learning L2 in order to get nearer psychologically to L2 community and to be identified with that cultural group. Most notably, some studies presenting results in certain contexts, apart from foreign language programs, specifically in United States or Canada, have proposed that integrative orientation was an insignificant or minor indicator of motivation and attitude, or that this orientation did not significantly improve language acquisition. As stated by Wesely (2009) studies producing these results have investigated, for instance, second language learners of English in Canada (Belmechri and Hummel, 1998), foreign language students in Hungary (Nikolov, 1999), and Arabic students in Israel (Kraemer, 1993). Instrumental and integrative motivation have been used in many studies to address issues of motivation and attitude; disregarding the fact that these concepts developed from a multi-faceted and complex model, and one that already involved attitude (see Yeon & Baik, 2006). Gardner (2001a) claimed that in the socio-educational model, attitudes toward the learning situation, as having the same relationship with motivation as the integrativeness variable, have proved to be more effective than instrumentality. 2. Methodology To achieve the objectives of this study, 240 Intermediate learners of English as a foreign language at the Iran language Institute (ILI), took part in this study. The sample consisted of 142 (59%) female and 98 (41%) male students. To measure the students’ language learning motivation, The Attitude Motivation Test Battery (AMTB) developed by Gardner (2004), was used. As a research instrument, it was developed to measure the major affective elements indicated to be included in L2 learning. The questionnaire consists of statements which the participants respond to by deciding to what extent they agree or disagree, based on a 6 point Likert-type scale ranging from ’’strongly agree’’ to ’’strongly disagree’’. The reliability and the validity of the AMTB were supported (Atay and Kurt, 2010). 3. Result and Discussion The data was analyzed through the SEM (Structural Equation Modelling) research method and the results of the analysis indicated that (see Figure 1 below) there was a significant positive r=.61 (61%) correlation/relationship was found between students’ attitudes toward the learning situation (ALS) and their integrativeness. Such a relationship between attitudes toward the learning situation and integrativeness has been shown by various other studies (e.g., Bernaus & Gardner, 2008; Gardner, 2001a, 2007). Therefore as mentioned previously, it would be expected that individuals whose levels of integrativeness is high and have a sense of concern with learning the target language to identify and integrate with another language community and culture would possess a positive view toward the language learning situation and have a positive evaluation of the English curriculum at school, the learning program, extra-curricular activities, and English teachers and vice versa. Figure 1: The relationship between attitudes toward the learning situation and integrativeness As indicated in Figure 2 below, another result of the study was that significant relationships were found between attitudes toward the learning situation and motivation, and integrativeness and motivation (similar to Gardner, 2001a) which imply that the more favorable the attitudes of learners towards the target language and its speakers, and the learning situation in general, the more motivated learners are likely to be. Figure 2: The relation of attitudes toward the learning situation and integrativeness with motivation This result of the study is supported by several studies conducted by Gardner himself (2001a, 2001b, 2007) and together with his colleagues (Bernaus & Gardner, 2008) in which it has been shown that these two variables have a positive direct effect on the learner’s motivation and are seen as positive predictors and support for motivation. In other words, motivation levels are affected and supported by integrativeness and attitudes toward the learning situation. The way learners evaluate their class and learning environment and the more open the learners feel toward the foreign language speakers and their lifestyle, and the more willing they are to accept and appreciate them, the more motivated and eager they will be to learn their language. 4. Conclusion in order to improve the students’ motivation, attention should be paid to their attitudes by having a skilled, committed, interesting teacher who possesses a good knowledge of the language, an exciting curriculum, purposeful assessment procedures, and carefully made lesson plans as well as an interesting and ordered course (Gardner, 2005) and presenting an acceptable and appealing image of the target language, its speakers and culture to the students. References Atay, D. & Kurt, G. (2010). The socio-educational model of second language acquisition: The Turkish context. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2, 3088-3093. Bernaus, M., Gardner, R.C. (2008). Teacher motivation strategies, student perceptions, student motivation, and English achievement. The Modern Language Journal, 92, 387-401. Csizer, K., & D?rnyei, Z. (2005). Language learners’ motivational profiles and their motivated learning behavior. Language Learning, 55 (4), 613-659. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. New York: Plenum. Dornyei, Z., (2005). The psychology of the language learner: Individual differences in second language acquisition. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Gardner, R.C. (1985). Social psychology and second language learning: The role of attitudes and motivation. London: Edward Arnold. Gardner, R. C. (2001a). Language learning motivation: The student, the teacher, and the researcher. Paper presented at Texas Foreign Language Education Conference, University of Texas at Austin, Texas. Gardner, R. C. (2001b). Integrative motivation and second language acquisition. In Z. D?rnyei & R. Schmidt (Eds.), Motivation and second language acquisition (Vol. 23, pp.1-19). Honolulu: University of Hawai’i, Second Language Teaching & Curriculum Center. Gardner, R. C. (2004). Attitude/Motivation Test Battery: International AMTB Research. Retrieved November 21, 2008, from http://publish.uwo.ca/~gardner Gardner, R. C. (2007). Motivation and second language acquisition. Porta Linguarum, 8, 9-20. Gardner, R. (2010). Integrative Motivation: Past, Present and Future. Retrieved October14,2010 from http://publish.uwo.ca/~gardner/docs/GardnerPublicLecture1.pdf Gardner, R. C. & Lambert, W. E. (1972). Attitudes and motivation in second-language learning. Rowley, MA: Newbury House. Gardner, R. C., & MacIntyre, P. D. (1993). A student’s contributions to second-language learning. Part II: Affective variables. Language Teaching, 26, 1-11. Ghazvini, S. D., & Khajehpour, M. (2011). Attitudes and motivation in learning English as second language in high school students. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 15, 1209-1213. Gholami, R., Allahyar, N., & Rafik-Galea, S. (2012). Integrative motivation as an essential determinant of achievement: A case of EFL high school students. World Applied Sciences Journal, 17(11), 1416-1424. Hsieh, P. P. (2008). Why are college foreign language students’ self-efficacy, attitude, and motivation so different? International Education, 38(1), 76-101. Wesely, P. M. (2009). The language learning motivation of early adolescent French and Spanish elementary immersion program graduates. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Minnesota. Yeon, S., & Baik, Y. (2006). Examining unsuccessful language learners: Motivation and learning strategy. Paper presented at the American Council of Teachers of Foreign Languages Annual Conference.
Masoomeh Khodadad