VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES

FACULTY OF ENGLISH LANGUAGE TEACHER EDUCATION

----

----

NGUY N NHU GIANG

STUDENTS’ PERCEPTION ON FACTORS AFFECTING ENGLISH LEARNING MOTIVATION OF STUDENTS IN STRATEGIC MISSION PROJECT AT ULIS, VNU

SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF BACHELOR OF ARTS (TEFL)

Hanoi, May 2011

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES
FACULTY OF ENGLISH LANGUAGE TEACHER EDUCATION

----

----

NGUY N NHU GIANG

STUDENTS’ PERCEPTION ON FACTORS AFFECTING ENGLISH LEARNING MOTIVATION OF STUDENTS IN STRATEGIC MISSION PROJECT AT ULIS, VNU

SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF BACHELOR OF ARTS (TEFL)

SUPERVISOR: HOÀNG TH H NG H I, M.A.

Hanoi, May 2011

Declaration
I hereby state that I: Nguy n Nhu Giang - Group 07.1.E1, being a candidate for the degree of Bachelor of Arts (TEFL) accept the requirements of the University relating to the retention and use of Bachelor’s Graduation Paper deposited in the library. In terms of these conditions, I agree that the origin of my paper deposited in the library should be accessible for the purposes of study and research, in accordance with the normal conditions established by the librarian for the care, loan or reproduction of the paper.

Hanoi, May 2011

Nguy n Nhu Giang

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
First and foremost, I wish to express my deepest gratitude to my supervisor Ms. Hoang Thi Hong Hai, M.A. for her invaluable guidance, her great patience as well as encouragement throughout the process of this research. I would also like to express my special thanks to my dear friends, Do Hanh Chi, Doan Thi Thu Phuong, Hoang Thi Thanh Huyen, Le Thanh Trung and Ly Huong Nguyen, for their help in material and data collection as well as their insightful comments. My sincere thanks go to the students of Strategic Mission Project 2010 who took part in the study and their tutors. Without their enthusiastic participation and cooperation, this research cannot be completed. Finally, I am grateful to my friends and family for their support and encouragement from the beginning to the end of the research process.

i

ABSTRACT
Since 2009, first-year students in the Strategic Mission Project of Vietnam National University, Hanoi have emerged as a new group of students studying English as non-majors at University of Languages and International Studies (ULIS). Very different from other groups of students at the university in terms of their goals and objectives as well as their needs, they call for careful consideration and serious research. Being one of the first to investigate this under-researched population, this study looks at English learning motivation as reported by the students themselves. By employing survey questionnaires and semi-structured interviews, the researcher wishes to find out the types of motivation the students possess, their changes in motivation while studying in the program and most importantly, the factors that have resulted in such changes. Analysis of data collected among 144 students with low English proficiency at the beginning of the school year has revealed that those students are very much careeroriented and urged to study by the pressure of examinations. More than half of them have their motivation dropped after seven months of studies as affected by multiple factors. Two factors found out to play the most significant part in causing such changes are the dissatisfaction with the syllabi as well as a lack of self-regulatory strategies. Findings of the study provide a reference for teachers and authorities that involve in teaching and monitoring students of the project. Appropriate action for further improvement of the project in the future is suggested at the end of the paper.

ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page Acknowledgement ............................................................................................................... i Abstract .............................................................................................................................. ii Table of contents ............................................................................................................... iii List of abbreviations............................................................................................................. v List of tables and charts...................................................................................................... vi CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION 1.1. Statement of the research problem ..................................................................................1 1.2. Theoretical background and practical rationale for the study.............................................2 1.3. Research aims and research questions, ............................................................................4 1.4. Scope of the study .........................................................................................................4 1.5. Significance of the study ................................................................................................5 1.6. Organization of the paper ...............................................................................................5 CHAPTER 2. LITERATURE REVIEW 2.1. Motivation in psychology...............................................................................................7 2.1.1. Expectancy-value theories of motivation ...............................................................7 2.1.2. Attribution theory and learned helplessness ...........................................................8 2.1.3. Achievement motivation theory and goal orientation theory.................................. 10 2.1.4. Self-determination theory (SDT)......................................................................... 12 2.2. Motivation and motivational factors in Foreign Language (L2) Learning......................... 15 2.2.1. An overview of research in L2 learning motivation .............................................. 15 2.2.2. Gardner and integrativeness................................................................................ 17 2.2.2.1. Integrativeness and the socio-educational model of SLA .......................... 17 2.2.2.2. The Attitude/Motivation Test Battery (AMTB)........................................ 20 2.2.3. L2 research on attributions ................................................................................. 21 2.2.4. Self-determination theory and L2 motivation ....................................................... 21 2.2.5. The Dornyei-Otto process-oriented model of L2 motivation ................................. 22 2.3. English learning motivation in Vietnam ........................................................................ 26

iii

CHAPTER 3. METHODOLOGY 3.1. Setting and participants ................................................................................................ 30 3.1.1. Setting ............................................................................................................. 30 3.1.2. Participants ...................................................................................................... 32 3.2. Data collection ............................................................................................................ 33 3.2.1. Data collection instruments ................................................................................ 33 3.2.1.1. Questionnaire ........................................................................................ 34 3.2.1.2. Semi-structured interviews ..................................................................... 36 3.2.2. Data collection procedure .................................................................................. 37 3.3. Data analysis ............................................................................................................... 39 CHAPTER 4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 4.1. Research Question 1 - Students’ motivation orientations ................................................ 41 4.2. Research Question 2 - Changes in students’ motivation level.......................................... 43 4.3. Research Question 3 - Factors affecting students’ motivation ......................................... 45 4.3.1. Quality of the learning experience....................................................................... 45 4.3.2. Sense of autonomy and self-regulatory strategies ................................................. 48 4.3.3. Teachers’ and parents’ influence......................................................................... 51 4.3.4. Cooperation and competitiveness in class ............................................................ 53 4.3.5. Influence of the learner group ............................................................................. 54 4.3.6. Attributional factors ........................................................................................... 55 4.3.7. Self-concept beliefs ........................................................................................... 56 4.3.8. Received feedback, praise, grades....................................................................... 58 CHAPTER 5. CONCLUSION 5.1. Summary of major findings .......................................................................................... 60 5.2. Implications ................................................................................................................ 61 5.3. Contribution of the study ............................................................................................. 62 5.4. Limitations of the study ............................................................................................... 63 5.5. Recommendations for further research .......................................................................... 64 REFERENCES ................................................................................................................ 66 APPENDICES ................................................................................................................. 70

iv

LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES
PAGE Table 2.1 Attributions as a function of stable and unstable/ external and internal causes Table 2.2 Table 3.1 Table 3.2 Table 4.1 Table 4.2 Table 4.3 Table 4.4 Table 4.5 Table 4.6 Table 4.7 Assessed components and measures in AMTB Main course books used in Strategic Mission Project 2010 Aims of question items Autonomy and learning motivation Parents’ influence and motivation In-class cooperation and motivation In-class competitiveness and motivation Peer influence and motivation Attributional factors and motivation Change of motivation due to students’ belief in their English aptitude Table 4.8 Table 4.9 Received feedback, praise and motivation Grades and motivation 58 58 20 32 35 49 51 53 54 55 56 57 11

Figure 2.1 Figure 2.2 Figure 2.3 Figure 4.1 Figure 4.2 Figure 4.3

The fundamental model of language learning Socio-educational model of second language acquisition A process model of L2 learning motivation Students’ motivation orientations Changes in students’ motivation level Influence of the quality of the learning experience on motivational level

18 19 23 42 44 46

Figure 4.4 Figure 4.5

Influence of self- regulatory strategies on motivational level Percentage of students acknowledging their teachers’ encouragement, friendliness, helpfulness and good teaching methods

50 52

v

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

ULIS: VNU: ELT: EFL: ESL:

University of Languages and International Studies Vietnam National University, Hanoi English Language Teaching English as a Foreign Language English as a Second Language

vi

CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION
This initial chapter states the problem and the rationale of the study, together with the aims, objectives and the scope of the whole paper. Above all, it is in this chapter that the research questions are identified to work as clear guidelines for the whole research. 1.1. Statement of the research problem Started in 2007, Strategic Mission is a project of Vietnam National University focusing on developing high-quality human resources of international standard in the context of globalization. The project aims at training students in 16 majors and 23 specialties. The students who wish to enroll in the project need to pass the national entrance examination to member universities of Vietnam National University, Hanoi (VNU) despite their English proficiency level. One key feature of the project is that students are trained with curriculum of international standard in which the language of instruction is English. This has brought an issue about whether the students accepted to the program meet the requirement of English proficiency so that they can attend classes in English. Reality has shown that most of the students need further English training before they can actually start courses of their majors. Those who cannot meet the required level of English after one year of training will be replaced into mainstream program. The job of teaching English to those students is assigned to University of Languages and International Studies (ULIS) and in previous years of the project, students of the same major were placed in the same
1

class for their English course lasting for one year. They were monitored by their own universities and teachers of ULIS came to teach them. However, from September 2010, students of all majors in the project are mixed and placed in 20 classes in accordance with their English level and after completing the English course, they will go back to their universities to start courses of their majors. This means that ULIS is now totally in charge of monitoring those students during their first year. They now emerge as a new group of students at ULIS that need to be paid attention to. A number of 1st year students of the Strategic Mission project have been reported by their tutors to be of low motivation and some others are said to have high motivation. As the leader of the tutor team for the project, the researcher of this study has a serious concern about factors that can motivate or de-motivate those 1st year students. Significantly, no formal research has been done on the English learning of those students in general and their motivation in particular. As a result, the researcher attempts to conduct a study on factors that affect learning motivation of students in Strategic Mission project at ULIS, VNU. 1.2. Theoretical background and practical rationale for the study Motivation in learning has captured a lot of attention from researchers as a complicated, yet important phenomenon that decides learners’ learning performance. Dornyei (2001, pp.1-2) states that motivation is what influences people’s behavior and it has been largely agreed to play a very important role in determining the success or failure of learners in any learning context. Language learning is, of course, not an exception. In particular, the overall findings of research in ELT (English

2

Language Teaching) show that learner’s positive attitudes and motivation are related to success in second language learning (Gardner, 1985, cited in Lightbown & Spada, 1999). As a result, understanding factors that have impacts, either negative or positive, on learners’ motivation is of great importance. There have been a number of studies done to explore students’ motivation at the Faculty of English Language Teacher Training Education (FELTE), ULIS. However, those studied students are of English major, so they are quite different from students of the Strategic Mission project regarding the purpose of studying English. Students of English major had already acquired a reasonable amount of English before they entered university and thus are already able to communicate in English. At college, they study English in depth from a linguistic approach. Meanwhile, students of Strategic Mission project study English as a tool to attend classes of their majors and ultimately use it at work after graduation. Moreover, the majority of them did not take any English test to be accepted in the project and in fact, 70% percent of the current 1st year students of the project were almost beginners in studying English at the start of 2010-2011 academic year. Therefore, it is not to be argued that the two learning contexts are totally different and a number of English teachers of ULIS are now facing a new task of teaching English effectively to Strategic Mission’s students. Involving in the task as a tutor, the researcher is highly motivated to conduct a research with a wish to contribute to the success of the project. To the researcher’s belief, factors affecting the students’ motivation have stood out as one of the most important issues that need to be studied.

3

1.3. Research aims and research questions The research aims at exploring the types of motivation possessed by 1st year students of Strategic Mission project and more importantly, factors that affect their learning motivation, from which pedagogical implications for improvement of the program can be drawn. To achieve these goals, the research attempts to answer the following questions: (1) What are the types of motivation possessed by 1st year students of Strategic Mission project at ULIS, VNU? (2) How has the motivation of the students changed after a period of time studying English at ULIS, VNU? (3) As perceived by students, what are the factors affecting their motivation that lead to those changes? 1.4. Scope of the study Currently, 1st year students of Strategic Mission project at ULIS, VNU are placed into 20 classes, named QT1 to QT20, according to their English level. Students of QT1, QT2, QT3, QT4, QT5 and QT19 are so far the best students among all starting at intermediate level of English at the beginning of the school year. QT20 are those of the least English competence. There is, however, little difference in level of students of the other QT classes, the students of which started at elementary level or slightly higher. To minimize the variables that can contribute to the research result, the researcher decided to focus on students of the other 13 QT classes only.

4

In addition, within the limitation of an undergraduate paper, the research only aims at examining the issue from the students’ perspective because the students themselves should understand the most about their own motivation. 1.5. Significance of the study The study was the first formal research on motivation of students of Strategic Mission project in ULIS. Overall, results of the research can be considered as a source of reference for both teachers of ULIS who involve in teaching those students as well as the management board of the project. To be more specific, the research gives an understanding of the students’ motivation which is expected to be useful for teachers in facilitating learning of their students. From a more macro level, necessary changes in curriculum design as well as criteria to accept students to the project might be considered by the authorities concerned in accordance with the research’s implications. 1.6. Organization of the paper The rest of the paper includes the following chapters: Chapter 2 – Literature review – provides the background of the study, including theories on motivation and L2 learning motivation, brief description of the context of English learning and teaching in Vietnam as well as discussions of related studies.

5

Chapter 3 – Methodology – describes the participants and instruments of the study, as well as the procedure employed to carry out the research. Chapter 4 – Data analysis and discussion – presents, analyzes and discusses the findings that the researcher found out from the data collected according to the three research questions. Chapter 5 – Conclusion – summarizes the main issues discussed in the paper, the limitations of the research, several pedagogical recommendations concerning the research topic as well as some suggestions for further studies. Following this chapter are the References and Appendices.

6

CHAPTER 2. LITERATURE REVIEW This chapter provides an overview of some influential motivation theories in psychology as well as research in L2 learning motivation, which gives this study a strong theoretical grounding. The last part of the chapter focuses on some similar research conducted in the tertiary educational context of Vietnam, the results of which are to be compared with the result of this study. 2.1. Motivation in psychology Motivation is a term which is widely used in various contexts. We have heard about motivation at work, motivation in sports and any other possible fields as something that plays an essential role in our achievement. It is a complicated phenomenon that has been defined in many a way. Nevertheless, all definitions would not deny its importance in human’s activities as it “activates, guides and maintains behavior over time” (Krause, Bochner, Duchesne, 2006, p.255). Therefore, it is reasonable enough that there has been a large amount of research and discussion on it with the introduction of numerous motivation theories or constructs such as selfdetermination, goal orientation, achievement, attribution, to name but a few. Those theories do not aim to argue what motivation is, but rather focus on identifying different types of motivation and its causes. 2.1.1. Expectancy-value theories of motivation The expectancy-value theory, first introduced by Fishbein in the 1970s has undergone certain stages of development resulted in a number of adapted models by different researchers in the field such as Wigfield, Tonks
7

and Eccles. In general, the theories highlight the “interaction of personality and environment in determining motivated behavior” (Mclnerney & Mclnerney, 2006, p. 215). The core assumption is that behavior is caused by the expectancies one has about the expectation of success and the value of that success. That is to say that when more than one behavior is possible, the one with the largest combination of expected success and value will be chosen. The theories help to explain why some individuals who appear to be equally able to do a task have different decisions on whether to perform it or not. Yet, Kanfer (1900; as cited in Guilloteaux, 2007, p.38) pointed out the major limitation of the expectancy-value models as not successful in explaining “the ways in which individuals maintain and sustain action until their intentions are fully realized.” 2.1.2. Attribution theory and learned helplessness Attribution theory is associated with the work of an American psychologist, Weiner. The theory, which falls into the categories of expectancy-value theories, is distinctive in the way it approaches what causes motivation in relation to emotion. It concerns the way an individual explains their success or failure or, in other words, how and what they attribute their performance to. Such attribution will in turn “influence that individual’s subsequent motivation and behavior.” (Krause et al., 2006, p.203). Weiner characterized all causes of achievements in three dimensions: locus of control, controllability and stability, which are assumed to have impacts on a person’s interpretation of the significance of success or failure (Mclnerney & Mclnerney, 2006, p. 223).

8

Locus of control refers to the location of a cause, which can be internal or external. Those with internal locus tend to attribute their success or failure to external causes like luck or task difficulty whereas those with external locus are more likely to consider their performance as result of internal factors such as their own ability or effort. These two orientations can give rise to different emotions, for example when a person’s success is attributed to his ability, he would feel a sense of pride and his self-esteem increases. Controllability is about whether an individual can have any control over causes of their performance, and that can also bring about a number of emotions, mostly related to one’s self esteem. An individual would feel guiltier if the causes of his failure are within his own control (internally controllable) and vice versa. (Graham & Weiner, 1996) The dimension of controllability is closely related to the construct of “learned helplessness,” developed by Seligman in the 1960s and 1970s, which is an expectation of failure based on previous experience that efforts will lead to failure (Krause et al., 2006). The idea started when Seligman was doing experiments on animals at the University of Pennsylvania. In the experiments, some animals received electric shocks, which they were not able to prevent or avoid. Later, when facing the same situation, though avoidance and escape was now possible, they were unable to act (Encyclopedia of Childhood and Adolescence). When an individual experience helplessness beliefs, it can result in loss of motivation. The same outcome can be observed when an individual believes that he has no control over his failure which he attributes to such factor as low ability.

9

Stability, which refers to the relative constancy of a cause over time, affects an individual’s expectancies of success or failure on a given task. Causes such as ability or aptitude are considered stable while factors such as effort, knowledge, skills are, in contrast, unstable. Success attributed to ability is believed to lead to expectancies of success while failure attributed to low ability can lead to expectancies of failure in subsequent situations. (Graham & Weiner, 1996) Attribution theory has great application in education. Students will be motivated if and teachers can help them to have a positive reaction to their success or failure. One example is that a teacher can make the students believe their failure is not perceived as a result of low ability and that it is controllable by efforts (Mclnerney & Mclnerney, 2006, p. 225). Table 2.1 (p.11) summarizes attributions and their impacts in terms of emotion and motivation. 2.1.3. Achievement motivation theory and goal orientation theory Atkinson and McClelland viewed motivation as achievement motivation which is described as a stable personality characteristic that drives some individuals to strive for success. (as cited in Krause et al., 2006, p.263). In the context of education, two types of learners can be distinguished from this theory: those with a high need for success and low tendency to avoid failure versus those with a higher tendency to avoid failure. The former would take risk doing tasks that they believe they will be successful and the latter would rather take easier tasks and tasks that are considered too difficult that most people would fail. (Guilloteaux, 2007, p. 32)

10

Table 2.1. ATTRIBUTIONS AS A FUNCTION OF STABLE AND UNSTABLE/ EXTERNAL AND INTERNAL CAUSES
Type of cause Locus of control EXTERNAL (uncontrollable) Failure experience Outcome attri buted to 1. Bad luck AFFECTIVE REA CTION MOTIVA TIONA L IMPACT Disappointment, annoyance, little shame Possible change in future performance, but not highly motivational Insufficient EFFORT AFFECTIVE REA CTION MOTIVA TIONA L IMPACT Disappointment, regret, guilt, some shame Expectation of possible change in future performance with increased effort. Probable increase in achievement behavior. Success experience Outcome attri buted to 5. Good luck AFFECTIVE REA CTION MOTIVA TIONA L IMPACT 6. Sufficient EFFORT AFFECTIVE REA CTION MOTIVA TIONA L IMPACT Pleasure, relief, satisfaction, augmented pride Possible change in future effort Maintenance of, or increased probability of ach ievement behavior Pleasure, surprise, thankfulness, relief, decreased pride Possible change in future performance, but not highly motivational

UNSTABLE

INTERNA L (controllable)

1. Difficult TAS K EXTERNAL (uncontrollable) AFFECTIVE REA CTION MOTIVA TIONA L IMPACT 2. Low AB ILITY AFFECTIVE MOTIVA TION MOTIVA TIONA L IMPACT Disappointment, increased shame, anxiety, embarrassment Avoidance of task in future with expectation of similar performance outcomes. Disappointment, little shame, possible frustration Withdrawal fro m task with expectations of similar performance outcome in future

7. Easy TASK AFFECTIVE REA CTION MOTIVA TIONA L IMPACT 8. High AB ILITY AFFECTIVE REA CTION MOTIVA TIONA L IMPACT Pleasure, confidence, satisfaction, competence, pride Increased probability of achievement behavior. Little pride, reduced pleasure and satisfaction Little mot ivational impact

STABLE

INTERNA L (uncontrollable)

(Adapted from Mclnerney & Mclnerney, 2006, p. 224)

11

A similar approach to motivation can be found in goal orientation theory, which is very influential among goal theories (Keblawi, 2009). The theory differentiates two types of goals that determine the types of activities one might get involved in: performance goals and mastery goals. Since this paper discussing learning motivation, let these two constructs be explained in the context of a classroom. Students with performance goals are motivated to perform well in an area. They are more interested in winning over others and get positive feedbacks rather than negative ones about their achievement. Whereas, those with mastery goals have the objective of mastery or control of a task or skill, i.e. they are more concerned about improving their competency. (Krause et al., 2006, p.260). Zimmerman & Kitsantas (1999) concluded that mastery goals may be mainly found in the course of acquiring a new skill while performance goals become important for maintaining interest once the basic skill is acquired. 2.1.4. Self-determination theory (SDT) Self-determination, initiated by Deci and Ryan, is one of the most influential theories in motivation. According to the theory, “to be selfdetermining means to experience a sense of choice in initiating and regulating one’s own actions” (Deci, Connell & Ryan, 1989, p. 580). This is also referred to as “autonomy”. The theory concerns the functional and experiential differences between self-motivation and external regulation. In other words, it differentiates between autonomous motivation and controlled motivation that result in behavior. (Gagné & Deci, 2005, p.333). When a person perceives that the locus of causality is internal to him or herself, the behavior is self-determined or autonomous, whereas when that is external, the behavior is controlled. It is noteworthy that “both self-determined and controlled behaviors are
12

motivated or intentional but their regulatory processes are very different” (Deci, Vallerand, Pelletier, & Ryan, 1991, p.327). While most other theories mainly focus on the expected goals or outcomes that drive individuals to act, SDT fills the gap by examining the underlying reasons why such goals or outcomes are expected. Deci and Ryan identified three basic psychological needs, the satisfaction of which is the reason for individuals to move toward situations and engage in actions: • The need for competence pertains to the need to experience opportunities to interact with social environment, and show one’s capacities confidently and effectively; • The need for relatedness imp lies a need to feel that one belongs with, is cared for, respected by, and connected to significant others (e.g., a teacher, a family) who are disseminating goals such as classroom values; • The need for autonomy involves a sense of unpressured willingness to engage in an activity. It is not to be confused with the need for competence. (as cited in Guilloteaux, 2007, p. 49) Employing empirical traditional methods, research on motivation in the light of SDT has identified several types of motivation arisen from the three basic needs. The most basic distinction is between intrinsic and extrinsic motivation (Ryan & Deci, 2000b, p.55). Intrinsic motivation is defined as the motivation to perform an activity for the sake of enjoyment and interest “in the absence of a reward contingency or control” (Deci & Ryan, 1985, p. 34). In contrast, extrinsic motivation refers to “behavior where the reason for doing it is something rather than an interest in the activity itself” (Deci & Ryan, 1985, p. 34). One example is that a student studies very hard just to get high marks or praises from his teachers. Intrinsic motivation is considered a phenomenon that reflects the positive potential of human

13

nature, something that one is endowed with at the time of birth. Such a nature can be observed in young children when they explore and learn from the world around. Intrins ic motivation is believed to be crucial to cognitive as well as social development and “represents a principal source of enjoyment and vitality throughout life” (Ryan & Deci, 2000a, p.70). When an ind ividual is intrinsically motivated, he experiences “interest, enjoyment” and feels “competence and self-determining” (Deci & Ryan, 1985, p. 34). Research in SDT has found out that extrinsic motivators negatively interacts with and undermines intrins ic motivation (Ryan & Deci, 2009, p. 173) SDT does not concern what causes intrins ic motivation but the supportive conditions that nurture it. It is for this reason that the theory offers numerous implications for education. Ryan and Deci (2009, p.171) stated that instead of supporting intrinsic motivation, “educational institutions too often attempt to replace it with strategies of external control, monitoring, evaluation, and artificial rewards to foster learning.” They have pointed out the great influences of social environments on motivation with two main approaches: controlling vs. autonomysupportive to learning (Ryan & Deci, 2009). Such influences can come from home, school and other external events (Deci et al.,1991). Research in SDT has shown that “autonomy support from both teachers and parents facilitate students’ intrins ic motivation and internalization” (Ryan & Deci, 2009, p.190) (the process in which extrinsically motivated behaviors become autonomous). Such support is, of course, to satisfy the three basic psychological needs mentioned above. There has been also clear research evidence to prove this true across cultures, including collectivist contexts (Ryan & Deci, 2009). Since Vietnam is a collectivist culture, it is possible that this can be
14

applied in this country though there has not been research of large scale to test the assumption. In a nutshell, though having d ifferent approaches to motivation, all theories discussed have one thing in common: they concern the reasons why an individual chooses one activity rather than another. Goal theories differentiate two types of goals which motivate behavior (mastery goals and performance goals); Attribution Theory distinguishes directions of attributing success or failure, which in turns influence motivation level and behavior (external or internal, stable or unstable, controllable or uncontrollab le); and SDT classifies two types of motivation based on whether an individual chooses to do an activity for intrinsic or extrinsic reasons. SDT, however, provides the clearest classification of motivation which is needed for this research as one of its main objectives is to identify types of motivation possessed by students. 2.2. Motivation and motivational factors in Foreign Language (L2) Learning 2.2.1. An overview of research in L2 learning motivation The field of L2 motivation research, which is closely related to Second Language Acquis ition (SLA), was initiated in 1959 and has been heavily influenced by the work of two Canadian social psychologists Lambert and Gardner. The most important conclusion of their research, which is socially-oriented, is that learning a second language is d ifferent from learning any other subject for it “involves imposing elements of another culture into one’s own lifespace” (Gardner & Lambert, 1972, p. 193) and because “it is easily influenced (positively or negatively) by a range of social factors, such as prevailing attitudes toward the language,

15

geo-political considerations, and cultural stereotypes” (Dornyei, as cited in Guilloteaux, 2007, p. 56). A number of empirical studies following the direction took place in Canada where there is co-existence of Frenchand-English speaking communities. The pioneering socio-educational model of second language acquisition in school contexts proposed by Gardner and Smythe (1975) was one the most significant results. The model has been revised several times. Another important contribution of the studies is the production of the Attitude/ Motivation Test Battery (AMTB), which was originally developed to investigate what seemed to be the major influential factors in the learning process of French as a second language in Canada. AMTB has been, however, used in many other parts of the world to examine student’s motivation in L2 learning. The social psychological approach of Gardner and his associates enjoyed its popularity during the 1960s, 70s and 80s in the field of L2 learning motivation research. Later on, results of other studies show that Gardner’s theory, which is of macro level, is inadequate in exp laining how motivation works in actual language classrooms. As a result, a new direction of a more mirco level (i.e. more classroom-situated) was taken by different researchers from the U.S.A and Europe with an aim not to reject but to enrich the social psychological approach (Guilloteaux, 2007). A more recent shift in L2 learning motivation research took place in the late 1990s with the publication of Dornyei and Otto’s process model of L2 motivation in 1998. A more detailed discussion of the model is provided later in this chapter. Bas ically, in this new approach,

16

motivation is viewed not simply as a static product but also as a dynamic process fluctuating over time. 2.2.2. Gardner and integrativeness As earlier mentioned, Gardner is the pioneer in researching L2 learning motivation and he approaches the matter from the social psychological point of view. There are three main areas which are very well developed in his theory: (1) the socio-educational model of SLA, (2) the Attitude/Motivation Test Battery (AMTB), and (3) the construct of integrative motive (also termed integrativness) (Dornyei, 1998, p.123). 2.2.2.1. Integrativeness and the socio-educational model of SLA According to Gardner (2005), ability and motivation are “two primary individual d ifference variables involved in language learning” and they function independently in a relative sense because a student with high language ability may still be low in motivation and vice versa (p.5). While ability is obviously endowed, motivation in language learning is influenced by two main factors which are educational setting and cultural context. This is shown in what Gardner considers the fundamental model of language learning (see figure 2.1). Gardner listed factors that influence language learning such as quality of instruction (teacher, curriculum, lesson plans), opportunities to use the language, socio-cultural milieu and expectations; student ability (intelligence and language aptitude); students affect (attitudes, motivation, anxiety); personal grouped them into two big variab les; language strategies. He categories, namely environment

characteristics (the first four) and student characteristics (the last three).
17

Figure 2.1. The fundamental model of language learning (Gardner, 2005, p. 5)

Though

acknowledging

the

importance

of

environment

characteristics, he argues that achievement still depends on how learners receive the influences, which is decided by student characteristics. (Gardner, 2005) Figure 2.2 (p.19) is the most recent version of the socioeducational model of SLA (presented by Gardner, 2005). The model shows factors that support motivation which, together with ability, leads to language achievement. In some other versions of the model, the term language aptitude is used instead of ability. Before the model is elaborated, it should be noted that integrativeness and instrumentality in the theory are orientations (reasons for learning a language), not motivation. There has been a misconception that the theory differentiates two types of motivation, viz. integrative and instrumental motivation and in fact these two terms have been used frequently in SLA research but are, many times, mistakenly attributed to Gardner’s theory (Gardner, 2010). Orientation is only a part of motivation. Gardner views motivation as a much more complex phenomenon which is shown through “persistence and constant effort,

18

Figure 2.2. Socio-educational mode l of second language acquisition (Gardner, 2005, p. 6)

desire to achieve mastery of the L2 and enjoyment of the L2 learning process” (as cited in Guilloteaux, 2007, p. 61). The model indicates that there are two classes of variables that have impact on motivation, i.e., attitudes toward learning situation and integrativeness. Learning situation includes the teacher, the course, classmates, teaching materials, extra-curricular activities associated with the course (as cited in Guilloteaux, 2007, p. 61). Integrativeness is “an individual’s openness to taking on characteristics of another cultural/ linguistic group” (Gardner, 2005, p.7). It is a favorab le attitude toward the L2 community. Another variable in the model is instrumentality is not given much attention to in comparison to the other two, yet Gardner acknowledged that it does play a role in level of motivation. Instrumentality reflects the desire to learn a second language for “purely practical reasons” (Gardner, 2005, p.8) such as earning a job or fulfilling a degree’s requirement. This is more the case of a foreign language learning context, especially an EFL (English as a Foreign Language) context.
19

Studies in different countries indicate that Gardner’s model (Guilloteaux, 2007).

in such contexts,

instrumentality should be paid much more attention than it is in

2.2.2.2. The Attitude/Motivation Test Battery (AMTB) AMTB is designed to measure different components of the socioeducational model of SLA. There are 11 subtests, nine with 10 items each, and two with 4 items. Five main variables assessed in the AMTB are attitudes toward the learning s ituation, integrativeness, motivation, instrumentality and language anxiety. Measures for each component are listed in Table 2.2. Table 2.2. Assessed components and measures in AMTB (based on Gardner, 2005)
COM PON EN TS Attitudes toward M EASURES the Language Teacher - Evaluation (T each) Language Co urse - E va lua tio n (Course) Inte grative orientatio n (IO) Intere st in Foreign la ngua ges (IFL) Attitudes to ward the La ngua ge co mmunity (ALC ) M otivation Motivational Intensity (M I) Des ire to Lea rn the Language (DESIRE) Attitudes to ward learning the la ngua ge (ALL) Instrume ntality Language Anxie ty Instrume nta l Orientatio n (INST) Language C la ss Anxiety (CL ASS) Language Use A nxie ty (USE)

le arning situatio n Inte grative ne ss

In the test, all items are multiple questions asking students to rate their level of agreement or disagreement to different statements (for an extract of AMTB, see Appendix 4). There have been doubts about

20

whether ATMB is appropriate for foreign language learning because AMTB was originally designed for the learning context in Canada, a bilingual country. However, Gardner has cleared this doubt by doing research in different countries of foreign language learning context (Croatia, Poland, Romania and Spain) and the results have indicated that AMTB is appropriate in those countries as well (Gardner, 2005). Because this study does not aim to access all components of Gardner’s model of SLA, AMTB is not applied here. Nevertheless, it is used by the researcher as a reference for the design of the questionnaire of the study (see Chapter 3 for more details). 2.2.3. L2 research on attributions According to Dornyei (as cited in Guilloteaux, 2007), there has not been much research conducted into the causal attributional processes of L2 learners. Results from some few studies, however, were congruent with the attributions patterns found in educational psychology (see 2.1.2 for more details of attribution theory). 2.2.4. Self-determination theory and L2 motivation Noels and colleagues in Canada started doing research into L2 learning context within the framework of Self-determination theory in early 2000s. One of their main aims is to investigate the relationship between SDT constructs and L2 orientations found by Gardner. Based on empirical results, Noels (as cited in Guilloteaux, 2007, p. 69) proposed three types of orientations that fuelled L2 motivation: (1) intrinsic reasons (e.g., enjoyment, satisfaction, a sense of fun) (2) extrinsic reasons (e.g., threat or rewards) (3) integrative reasons (i.e., positive contact with L2 speakers and eventual identification with the L2-speaking community)
21

In this sense, extrins ic reasons are similar to instrumental orientation in Gardner’s theory. Noels’ proposal is able to link SDT and Gardner’s theory on L2 motivation. SDT (see 2.1.4) originally distinguishes two types of motivation basing on the reasons why one chooses to do an activity and thus, it is similar to the concept of orientation in Gardner’s theory in nature. For the first objective of this study (i.e., identifying different types of L2 learning motivation possessed by students), the researcher decides to replace the term ‘types of motivation’ with ‘types of orientations’ proposed by Noels as above because that reflects the true nature of the concept. 2.2.5. The Dornyei-Otto process-oriented model of L2 motivation In the process-oriented model of L2 motivation developed by Dornyei and Otto (1998), language learning motivation is viewed as “a dynamic factor that displays continuous fluctuation,” changing over time, and not as a static attribute in other existing models of L2 motivation (Dornyei, 2005, p.83). The model was an effort to put all research in L2 motivation and educational psychology into a framework and to “include every major motivational factor from previous studies […] that has been found to influence the commitment to learning.” (Dornyei & Otto, 1998, p.51). Dornyei-Otto’s model is based on Action Control Theory of Heckhausen and Kuhl. The theory outlines the two sequentially ordered phases within the motivated behavioral process: • The predecisional phase (“choice motivation”) – forming an intention to act; • The postdecisional phase (“executive motivation) – initiating action, preserving, and overcoming obstacles until the action is eventually completed (as cited in Guilloteaux, 2007, p. 73)

22

Figure 2.3. A Process Model of L2 Learning Motivation
Pre actional s tage CHOICE MOTIVATION Motivational functions : • Setting goals • Forming intentions • Launching action Actional Stage EXCUTIVE MOTIVATION Motivational functions • Generating and carrying out subtasks • Ongoing appra isal (of one’s achievement • Action control (selfregulation) Main motivational influences : • Quality of the learning experience (pleasantness, need significance, coping potential, self and social image) • Sense of autonomy • Teachers’ and parents’ influence • Classroom rewardand goal structure (e.g., competitive or cooperative) • Influence of the learner group • Knowledge and use of self-regulatory strategies (e.g., goal setting, learning, and self-motivating strategies) Postactional Stage MOTIVATIONAL RETROSPECTION Motivational functions • Forming causal attributions • Elaborating standards and strategies • Dismissing the intention, and further planning

Main motivational influences : • Various goal properties (e.g., goal relevance, specific ity and proximity) • Values associated with the learning process itself, as well as its outcomes and consequences • Attitudes toward the L2 and its speakers • Expectancy of success, and perceived coping potential • Learner beliefs and strategies • Environmental support or hindrance

Main motivational influences : • Attributional factors (e.g., attributional styles and biases) • Self-concept beliefs (e.g., self-confidence and self-worth) • Received feedback, praise, grades

(adapted from Dornyei & Otto, 1998, p. 85)

23

There exist three stages, viz. preactional stage, actional stage and postactional stage in the process model of L2 learning motivation (figure 3). The stages are viewed in two dimens ions: Action Sequence and Motivational Influences. The action sequence was elaborated by Dornyei and Otto (1998) as follows. 1. Preactional stage: First, motivation needs to be generated – the motivational dimension related to this initial phase can be referred to as choice motivation, because the generated motivation leads to the selection of the goal or task that the individual will pursue. 2. Actional stage: Second, the generated motivation needs to be actively maintained and protected while the particular action lasts. This motivational dimension has been referred to as executive motivation, and it is particularly relevant to sustained activities such as studying an L2, and especially to learning in classroom settings, where students are exposed to a great number of distracting influences, such as off-task thoughts, irrelevant distractions from others, anxiety about the tasks, or physical conditions that make it difficult to complete the task. 3. Postactional stage: there is a third phase following the completion of the action – termed motivational retrospection – which concerns the learners’ retrospective evaluation of how things went. The way students process their past experiences in this retrospective phase will determine the kind of activities they will be motivated to pursue in the future. (Dornyei & Otto, 1998, p.84) Language learning can happen in several months, years or even a lifetime and motivation is certain to change on whatever level for better or for worse. It would be a more complete picture to look at L2 motivation from this point of view where motivation goes through different stages, each of which needs necessary conditions to happen. The model highlights some motivational influences, in other words, the factors that have impacts on students’ motivation in each stage (see figure 2.3). We can see how different theories are included in the model.

24

Integrativeness and attitude towards L2 and its speakers of Gardner theory, for instance, are two motivational factors in pre-actional phase; learner autonomy of SDT in actional phase; or learners’ attribution of success or failure of Attribution theory in postactional phase. Given the strong points of the process model of L2 motivation, the researcher decides to adopt this temporal point of view on L2 motivation to be the basis for the study. On the one hand, the targeted participants, the current freshmen of Strategic Mission project study English as a foreign language over the course of one year and their motivation is expected to change over time. The process model appears to provide the most reasonable framework for those students’ motivation to be investigated. On the other hand, no other models have provided a complete list of motivational factors as this model. However, the model does have limitations as pointed out by Dornyei (2005) himself. The basic problem is that it is difficult to define when one actional process starts or ends. Furthermore, students are likely to engage in more than one actional process at a time and it is not certain that their engagement in other ongo ing activities does not interfere with the actional process of L2 learning. Being well-aware of this shortcoming, the researcher does not aim to examine in detail how motivation goes through each phase, but rather views the students’ learning activities throughout the school year as a whole process in which there are changes in level of motivation after a period of studying. Basically, the study compares the motivation level when the students started their English program with that in the forth out of five modules of the program; and at the same time focuses on find ing out which motivational factors are responsible for the changes. This

25

means that the pre-actional phase will not be the main focus. The research only aims to find out types of orientations or goals of the students at this phase (see 2.2.4). 2.3. English learning motivation in Vietnam English is considered a foreign language in Vietnam and thus it is an EFL learning context. Compared to other foreign languages commonly studied in Vietnam (e.g., Mandarin, French, Japanese), English is the most prominent being included in the curriculum of most schools and colleges. Once included in the curriculum, English becomes a compulsory subject as many others. One would not argue the importance of studying English since it is largely agreed in Vietnam that being good at English brings an individual more and better education or career opportunities. Rather, it is rather the question of how to make English teaching and learning effective. Students’ learning motivation has emerged as one major concern of Vietnamese teachers and researchers. A number of attempts to investigate students’ English learning motivation have been made with a primary purpose of getting an understanding of what lie behind motivation and how to motivate students to learn. Due to space limitation, the researcher chooses to review only some studies that are closely related to her research. At secondary education level, Luu (2008) and Hoang (2006) examined students’ motivation to learn speaking at Yendinh 1 high school and Gia Loc senior secondary school respectively. Find ings of their studies show that though students learned speaking for various reasons, their motivation was driven mostly by extrinsic reasons like pressure of examinations and opportunities for further education or
26

future jobs. An interest in the language and its culture did not seem to have much impact on their motivation. Another reason emerged from their survey was that quite a number of students studied English so that they can understand and sing English songs, which is quite a short-term goal. Luu (2008) went further to find out the factors that encourage students to speak in c lass. Speaking activities, teaching methods and speaking topics seemed to encourage them to speak the most. Hoang (2006) chose another direction enquiring into what made the students unwilling to speak in class. Speaking anxiety, boring topics, inefficient language competency were among the top hindrances. At tertiary education level, there is a distinction between English and non-English major students. For second-year non-English major students at Hanoi University of Education, Tran’s study (2007) pointed out that the need for higher education and future work was the top reason that urged the students to learn speaking English. Pressure of getting high marks in examination was another important motive. Again, extrinsic reasons were underlined. There is only a shift in the order of importance between examination pressure and education and career needs, which is not difficult to understand as students’ age increases. This result was confirmed in Nguyen’s study (2008) into non-major firstyear students’ motivation in learning reading skills at Hanoi Univers ity of Industry. A career orientation was also seen among second-year tourismmajor students at Tourism and Foreign Language Department of Sao Do College of Industry. Hoang’s study (2009) showed that those students learned speaking skill mainly to be able to communicate with foreigners

27

and get a job as a result. With such orientation, their interest in learning about English speaking communities, their cultures and people is unsurprisingly high. Significantly, grade pressure did not seem to affect many of them in learning to speak English. Both Tran (2007) and Hoang (2009) investigated factors that demotivate students to learn speaking. Students’ lack of learning strategies and methods was reported in the studies to negatively affect learning motivation of most students in class. While Tran (2007) was ab le to point out only two more de-motivating factors, namely students’ anxiety and learning conditions, Hoang (2009) had a longer list of such factors. Crowed class, unfavorable classroom atmosphere, inactive group members and limited language competency were among the top demotivating factors found out in his study. Overall, two outstanding similarities can be seen in the reviewed studies. First, they only focus on students’ motivation to learn a particular skill, not English as a who le. Second, all of them are classroom oriented, and thus they focus on factors that motivate or demotivate students to learn in class only. None of the studies concern how learning motivation can be maintained once the students are outside of their classrooms. This can be considered as one of their limitations because studying is a process occurring not only in class but also in students’ daily life. Put together, those similarities have created a gap for the researcher to conduct a research with the population of first-year students of Strategic Mission Project at ULIS, VNU with an attempt to examine factors that affect students’ motivation to learn English in general.

28

Summary In a nutshell, this second chapter provides an overview of some influential motivation theories in psychology as well as research in L2 learning motivation. Motivation orientations and factors that might have influences on students’ learning motivation were addressed and defined. The last part of the chapter focuses on some similar research conducted in the educational context of Vietnam, the results of which are to be compared with the result of this study.

29

CHAPTER 3. METHODOLOGY
In the previous chapter, the literature on the research topic was briefly reviewed for the theoretical basis of the study. This chapter provides a whole picture of the methodology as the participants, the instruments (including questionnaires and semi-structured interviews) as well as the procedure of data collection and analysis are d iscussed in detail. 3.1. Setting and participants 3.1.1. Setting From the academic year of 2010-2011, first year students of the Strategic Mission project coming from different member univers ities of VNU are mixed up and placed into 20 c lasses basing on their English proficiency level. Over the course of one year, they one by one go through five modules within their English program. The target set for them is to get at least 5.5 IELTS in order to move on to the second year of study. During their first year, they studied mostly English (some might take two or more classes depending on their primary univers ity) and therefore it should be expected that learning English takes most of their time and is their primary concern. Those students study English at ULIS five days a week and five sessions of 50 minutes a day. In the first four sessions, they study with their teachers using their main course book(s) for each module (see Table 3.1 for details of course books used). Depending on the availability of English teachers at ULIS, up to 10 teachers can co-teach one class within one week. The last session is a tutorial in which a volunteer junior or senior student of English-major comes and helps the
30

students with any question they might have regarding the contents of the lessons in previous sessions. In general, there are two striking d ifferences between 1 year students of Strategic Mission project and ULIS students of English major. First, they do not study four skills (speaking, writing, listening and reading) separately as those majoring in English. In their program, four skills are integrated (except for writing in module B2 and C1). Second, they study English in order to use it in their studies in the subsequent years, in which courses of their major are taught in English. They share the same target of reaching the required English proficiency level. The 20 classes, named from QT 1 to QT 20, make up a population of 563 students (data provided by Office of Training, ULIS). There are two distinct levels of English among the students. Students of QT 1, QT 2, QT 3, QT 4, QT 5 and QT 19 are of the higher level, starting at preintermediate at the beginning of the program. In general, they have been reported as having satisfactory performance (Head Teacher of the program, personal communication, November, 2010). Students of other classes are of the lower level, starting as beginners or slightly higher. QT 20 is a special class into which all the least competent students were placed after the students received result of End of A1 module test. In order to reduce the number of variab les, the researcher decided to eliminate students of the above seven special classes and invo lve classes from QT 6 to QT 18 only. Data of for the study were collected in the third week of March, 2011 when the students were in week 5 of module B1.
st

31

Table 3.1. Main Course books used in Strategic Mission Project 2010
QT 1-5 + (QT 19) Module A1 (6 weeks) Module A2 (6 weeks) Module B1 (6 weeks) Module B2 (6 weeks) New English F ile Intermediat e (+ Step-up to IELTS for QT 19) New English F ile Upper-Intermediate (+ Step-up to IELTS for QT 19) IELT S Exp ress Intermediat e Effective Academic Writing 2 The C omplete Presentation Skills New English F ile Pre-intermediate QT 6-18 + (QT20) New English F ile Elem ent ary Pronunciat ion in Us e Elem entary New English F ile Pre-intermediate Pronunciat ion in Us e Elem entary New English F ile Intermediat e (Interact ions 1 – Reading & List ening) Focus on IELT S Foundation Focus on Skills for IELT S Foundat ion Paragraph Writing

Handbook Module C1 (6 weeks) Effective Academic Writing 3 IELT S Exp ress Upper-Int ermediate IELT S Exp ress Intermediate Effective A cademic Writing 2 The Complete Presentat ion Skills

Handbook

*Note that QT 20 and QT 19 were formed after Module A1. Their students were drawn from different classes basing on the result of End of A1 module test. 3.1.2. Participants The target population of the research is quite large with 374 students of 13 QT classes (from QT 6 to QT 18). The number of students in each c lass ranges from 25 to 30. Due to the limitation of an undergraduate paper, only a limited number of all the students were involved in the study. Regarding sampling method, it was not practical within the researcher’s capacity to employ simple random sampling and deliver the questionnaire, which is one main instrument of the research, to the selected students. Cluster sampling (Cohen, Manion, & Morrison, 2007, p.112) in which each class was considered a cluster was chosen

32

instead. The method offers two main advantages: (1) it is easier to administer the questionnaire delivery procedure; (2) it can help to minimize influence of external factors such as the physical environment or moods of the students. Considering the needed sample for student participants, the researcher decided to survey 6 out of the 13 classes. The researcher used simp le random sampling (Cohen, et al., 2007, p.110) to choose six classes and asked them for their consents to take part in the survey. All classes agreed to the researcher’s request. Expecting that there would be students absent on the surveying day and some returned questionnaires could have errors, the researcher delivered questionnaires to all students present at the classes on the surveying day. 3.2. Data collection 3.2.1. Data collection instruments Considering the research questions to be answered, survey questionnaire was chosen as the main instrument of the research as it allows researchers to “gather information that learners are able to report about themselves, such as their beliefs and motivations about learning or their reactions to learning and classroom instruction and activities” (Mackey & Gass, 2005, pp.92-93). Moreover, it is useful for collecting survey information and is rather straightforward to analyze since it often provides numerical data. (Wilson & McLean, as cited in Cohen, et al., 2007, p. 317) In order to gain better insights into the issues investigated, semistructured interviews were also conducted after data from the questionnaire were viewed. This instrument helped to elicit additional information and clear amb iguous points from the result of the survey questionnaire.
33

3.2.1.1. Questionnaire While both Vietnamese and English versions of the questionnaire are included in the research report, only Vietnamese versions were delivered to the participants since their English level may not sufficient enough to ensure full understanding of the questionnaire. Clear instruction is given at the beginning of the questionnaire to inform the students about the purpose of the research and the confidentiality of the information inquired. A definition of motivation is also provided on the first page of the questionnaire so as to avoid students’ misunderstanding of the concept. Following the instruction is the questionnaire items which are categorized into two groups. The first group consists of factual questions to seek students’ names and contact information. Their phone numbers and emails were collected so that the researcher could contact them for the subsequent interviews. The second group includes mostly closedended attitudinal questions in which the students have to rate d ifferent statements on scales. Yet, the questionnaire still allowed participants to add comments or other options to the answer of the questions. There are only four open-ended items in the questionnaire because students are normally lazy answering open-ended questions and when it takes them much time to do the questionnaire many of them would not want to do it, which may result in poor data quality. With this highly-structured questionnaire, it did not take the students too much time. Data gained from the second part are to answer the three research questions. Table 3.2 provides subjects of investigation of all question items in the questionnaire.

34

Table 3.2. Aims of question items
Item 1- 6 (Research Question 1) to investigate students’ motivation orientations Item 7-8 (Research Question 2) to investigate changes in students’ motivation level 1 2-4 5-6 7-8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 intrins ic orientation extrins ic orientation integrative orientation Change in motivation leve l novelty pleasantness need significance coping potential self image social image

#1 Quality of the le arning expe rie nce #2 Sense of autonomy

Item 9- 30 (a/b) (Research Question 3) to investigate factors influencing students’ motivation leve l

#3 Teachers ’ and parents’ influe nce

#4 Class room structure

competitiveness cooperation

#5 Influe nce of the learner group #6 Knowledge and use of goal setting self-regulatory s trategies self-motivating strategies self-confidence #7 Self-concept beliefs self-worth #8 Attributional factors #9 Received feedback, praise, grades

Since the participants cannot understand those terminologies, the researcher expressed them in statements about themselves similar to the question items in AMTB (see 2.2.2.2 for more details). The researcher chose to use an even number scaling system (6 point scale) for all items (except for item 7 and 8) to minimize the impact of central tendency which is “a tendency of participants to opt for the mid-point of a 5-point or 7-point scale” (Cohen, et al., p.327). This tendency is especially common among East Asian respondents who are more or less influenced by the “doctrine of the mean.” Full vers ion of the questionnaire is

35

provided in Appendix 1. Following is one example of the questionnaire items.
11a. The Englis h program has he lped me to reach my goal(s) of s tudying Englis h. 1 Strongly disagree 2 Moderately disa gree 3 Slightly disa gree 4 Slightly agree 5 Moderately agree 6 Strongly agree

3.2.1.2. Semi-structured Interviews The questionnaire is the main instrument of this research, yet it yields certain disadvantages. The main problem was that almost all items in the questionnaire were discrete point questions and thus it does not allow the researcher to gain more detailed information. To increase data validity, semi-structured interviews were employed as a follow-up. The aim of the researcher for interviews is to gain better insights into the research questions and to discuss further information about the items raised in the questionnaire. 10 interviews were made in Vietnamese so that there would be fewer problems in communication between the researcher and the interviewees. Interviewees’ anxiety, if any, was also reduced. The interviewees were selected basing on the result of the questionnaires they have done. Basically, five students who reported an increase in motivation and five others who reported a decrease in motivation were interviewed. Appendix 3 shows a sample of interview questions, which vary from interviewee to interviewee depending on their responses in the questionnaire.

36

3.2.2. Data collection procedure Stage 1- Piloting After being reviewed by two experienced teachers, the drafted questionnaire were revised and delivered to 10 students of the same population of the actual participants for piloting. The researcher reached those contacts with the help of an acquaintance who is a student of the project himself. Staying in the university dorm, it was easy for him to introduce his peers to the researcher. Piloting was administered via emails and informal telephone talks, which allowed the students and the researcher to discuss any unclear points found. They also added

comments on both the content and format of the questionnaire. The questionnaire was then finalized and ready to be delivered to the participants. Those 10 students were, of course, not included in the participants of the main study. Stage 2 - Surveying In the third week of March 2011, the questionnaires were delivered to all students who were present at the time of surveying in six selected classes. Some careful considerations regarding location, time and collector were made to maximize data validity. Those factors can have some certain impact on how the participants give out information in a survey (Mackey & Gass, 2005). The presence of teachers in the surveyed classes can help to increase participants’ attention yet might cause information inaccuracy since the questionnaire contains some items asking the students to evaluate teaching quality and their curriculum. As a result, the researcher asked the partic ipants to complete the questionnaire in their tutorials
37

where there were only tutors whose role was to provide them with support after each formal lesson with their teachers. Additionally, the task needed to be done on the same day so as to minimize differences in physical environment, a factor that might affect participants’ emotion and moods. Since the researcher could only survey one class at a time, she asked five tutors of five classes to help her out. The five collectors were explained about how they should administer the questionnaire. First, the collectors explained briefly about the aim of the research, and guaranteed the students that any information they provided would be kept in strict confidence. Then they asked the students for their consent to participate in the research. The students could, of course, refuse to do so. Fortunately, 100% of the students present agreed to do the questionnaire. Next, the collectors instruct the students how to do the questionnaire and asked them to raise any questions. Finally, when collecting the completed questionnaires, the collectors checked to make sure no questions were left out. In total, 148 questionnaires were returned. Stage 3- Interviewing After the data obtained from the questionnaire were synthes ized, 10 students who reported significant change in motivation level were selected to be interviewed. Five were of increased motivation level and the others were of decreased motivation. The researcher contacted the selected students via telephone and asked for their consent to join the interview. All of them agreed to join as time and location for the interviews were negotiated and fixed. All the interviews started with some informal social chat between the interviewer and the interviewee so that a friendly atmosphere was created. The researcher was able to

38

record only four interviews as six other students refused to be recorded. For those interviews, the researcher tried to take quick notes as the students were speaking and revised the note right after each one. 3.3. Data analysis Data analysis started with questionnaires editing (Cohen, et al., 2007. p.347) and four questionnaires with errors were eliminated reducing the number of questionnaires analyzed to 144. In those four questionnaires, the participants chose the same answer for every item, which shows that they might have tried to complete the questionnaire as soon as possible so that they could return it. The next step was to synthesize the data obtained from the questionnaires and classified them to answer the research questions. On the one hand, responses from closed-ended questions were calculated, transferred into numerical form and summarized into graphs. Descriptive statistics were employed to display the findings from the survey. On the other hand, responses from open-ended questions were transcribed and categorized by key words of the statements and used to supplement research question 1 and 3. Finally, qualitative data collected during the interviews were transcribed and summarized to be referred to when data analysis was illustrated. Summary All in all, this chapter has justified the methodology of the paper by elaborating on the targeted group of participants involved in the process of data collection, who are 1 year students of 6 classes of the
st

39

Strategic Mission Project studying at ULIS, VNU. Next, questionnaires and interviews were employed as the data collection instruments with the aim of addressing the three research questions from the analysis of data. Such justifications on the methodology would help pave the way for the results and implications discussed in the next chapter.

40

CHAPTER 4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION In the previous chapter, the methodology of the study has been clarified with descriptions of the participants, the instruments and the process of data collection and analys is. In this chapter, all the collected data will be analyzed and discussed in details to reveal the answers to each research question in turn. Data collected from questionnaires and interviews will be integrated to support and complement each other. Where necessary and possible, find ings of the research are compared to that of previous studies. 4.1. Research question 1 – Students’ motivation orientations Overall, students’ responses to the question show that their motivation is fuelled and shaped by various orientations. It is a combination of intrins ic, extrinsic and integrative orientations, each of which weighs differently (figure 4.1). Data in figure 4.1 indicate that extrinsic orientations (career opportunities, education opportunities and exam pressure) are the most dominant component in students’ motivation. Over 80% of the students felt that those reasons orientated their motivation to learn English most significantly. This result confirms the results of some previous studies reviewed in chapter 2. A clear career orientation can be seen as 93 students out of 144 strongly agreed that they learned English for better career opportunities, 35 students moderately agreed and no one strongly disagreed. That should be considered a positive sign since the majority of the students had not only short-term goal (examinations) but also long-term goals (education and career). The interviews revealed that this orientation could be realized through the students’ life experience during

41

Figure 4.1. Students' motivation orientations

Interst in L2 culture Contact with L2 speakers Career oppoturnities Education opportunities Exam pressure Instrinsic 0.0% 20.0% 40.0% 60.0% 80.0% 100.0%

Instrinsic Strongly/ moderately disagree slightly disagree/ agree Strongly/ moderately agree 20.1% 49.3% 30.6%

Education Career Contact Exam Interst in opportuni oppoturni with L2 pressure L2 culture ties ties speakers 2.8% 13.2% 84.0% 3.5% 11.8% 84.7% 2.1% 9.0% 88.9% 8.3% 36.1% 55.6% 25.7% 52.8% 21.5%

the school year. Six out of ten interviewed students claimed that at first they studied English as a requirement of their program but later realized that English could bring up a lot of career and education opportunities. Regarding intrinsic motivation to learn English, only 30.6% of the students clearly saw it as part of their motivation; nearly half of them were not sure and one fifth of the students did not possess this orientation. Interest in L2 culture was even of a lower position as can be seen in the chart. This fact is not difficult to understand since those students do not major in English. They do not study the language as linguists but as users. The finding is in line with results of the two studies on non-major population of Tran (2007) and Nguyen (2008) (see 2.3).

42

A desire to be able to speak to and make friends with English speakers was reported by more than half of the participants. Only 8.3% of them did not feel this desire. Three students who were interviewed stated that it was because of this desire that pushed them study very hard. This desire is considered in the literature to be integrativeness, yet when applied to an EFL context as it is in Vietnam, it may be fairer to view it as both integrativeness and instrumentality. The reason is that in Vietnam, an English speaking community does not exist noticeably. Six participants who were interviewed also said that they wanted to be able to speak to foreigners because in the future, their job might require them to. Few students added more reasons to learn English to the questionnaire such as learning English as a tool to access information, to learn English songs and to play games, or learning English to please their parents and to follow the trend because most people nowadays learn a foreign language. All of the added reasons in fact fall into the category of extrinsic motivation. This again highlights the most dominant part of the students’ motivation to learn English. In conclusion, extrinsic orientation is found to be the most dominant component in students’ motivation. Integrative and intrinsic motivation is less important to the majority of the students.

4.2.

Research Question 2 – Changes in students’ motivation level
Regarding changes in students’ motivation to learn English, more

than a half of the surveyed students reported a drop in motivation level as shown in figure 4.2. Approximately 35% of them had their motivation level increased and only 9% was able to maintain their motivation level at positive level after seven months pursuing the program. This result
43

Figure 4.2. Changes in Students' Motivation Level

1.4% 9% 35.4% Increa sed Decreased 54.2% Ma intained at low level Ma intained at positive level

cannot be said to be a positive one to the teachers and the authorities concerned. Nevertheless, their motivation to learn English did not seem to drop significantly, which was indicated by the students’ ratings of their motivation level at the beginning of their school year and at the time they d id the questionnaire. Though such rating is quite subjective, it reflects more or less the students’ level of motivation change. Only six students had their motivation level dropped by 3 points from “high” to “very low,” or from “very high” to “low”. The majority of the rest just reported a drop by 1 point, for example from “high” to “average.” It should be noted that an increase or decrease in level of motivation is not to be understood as the only changing trend over seven months in the program. It could be possible that, for example, students’ motivation increased a little at the beginning of the school year and then later started to drop. This was reported by two students interviewed. Thus, changes in motivation elaborated above should be considered quite relative and as an overall trend only.

44

4.3.

Research Question 3 – Factors affecting students’ motivation
In this part, results of the study are discussed according to nine

main categories of factors that might have an influence on the students’ motivation, either negative or positive.

4.3.1. Quality of the learning experience
Figure 4.3 illustrates the opinions of the participants on the relationship between their learning experience and their change in motivation. Regarding the design of the English program, only 17.19% of the students with increased motivation expressed their satisfaction over its appropriateness while more than half of them either slightly agreed or slightly disagreed. The other fifth did not think that the program was appropriate enough and that did not help them to increase their motivation. The situation is not very different for the other group as 36.25% of them attributed their drop in motivation to the inappropriate syllab i. 45% stayed quite neutral and nearly 19% of them did not think their motivation dropped because the program was inappropriate. Generally speaking, the des ign of the English program for the project does not enjoy favor of the majority of the students surveyed, which caused a drop in motivation of a number of students of the project. Those who were not so satisfied with the program were asked for their comments on the syllabi. 79 participants responded to this question. 45 students claimed that the program was too intensive with a great amount of knowledge taught within a short amount of time. Many

45

Figure 4.3. Influe nce of the quality of the le arning e xperience on mo tivational leve l

increased motivation group
appropriate syllabi interesting lessons goals reached good coping potential maintained self-image maintained social image 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

maintain maintain good goals interestin appropria ed social ed selfcoping reached g lessons te syllabi image image potential strongly/moderately agree slightly agree/disagree strongly/moderately disagree 17.19 64.06 18.75 20.31 51.56 28.13 25 68.75 6.25 51.7 37.5 10.94 14.06 65.63 20.31 17.19 62.5 20.31

decreased motivation group
inappropriate syllabi uninteresting lessons goals not reached limited coping potential worsened self-image worsened social image 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

worsened worsened limited uninteres inappropr goals not social selfcoping ting iate reached image image potential lessons syllabi strongly/moderately disagree 38.75% slightly agree/disagree strongly/moderately agree 41.25% 20% 20% 36.25% 43.75% 13.75% 37.50% 48.75% 25% 27.50% 47.50% 20% 61.25% 18.75% 18.75% 45% 36.25%

of them were not English majors at high school and that caused them great d ifficulty. Some students added that Module A1 which was of elementary level was quite appropriate but then the level increased too fast. They became a little unbalanced starting to learn English as nonmajors and long before they gained back their balance, the program had

46

become too difficult for them. They started to feel lost and their motivation decreased as a result. Some others shared that they got shocked moving from A1 to B1 and later B2. 13 students stated that there was a big gap between what they learned in class and what was tested in their end of module examinations, which made them confused and discontented with their grades. Eight others did not like the combination of course books used in the program. They said that each course book alone should be good but when they were used together, a big and illogical amount of knowledge was created. Ten other students did not think the program was too difficult but it was the amount of time studying English each week that made them feel loaded and bored. Other opinions included the unattractive appearance of the books, unexciting activities and a lack of focus on grammar. Personal interviews revealed many students did not register to join the project before taking the entrance examination to universities. After entering their college, they were asked to enroll in the project and just took a placement test so that they would be placed with peers of the same English level. In fact, the project came out of a sudden to them. Those with low English competency first thought that a program would be appropriately designed for them but it turned out to be too challenging as they moved through the modules. In line with the dissatisfaction with the program design was a high percentage of students of claiming their goals in the program were not reached and their coping potential was limited. Approximately 47% of the students with decreased motivation felt discouraged when their goals were not reached and around 48% of them were disheartened being not

47

able to cope with the challenges of the program. The number of students who had the opposite opinion was just one fifth or less. In the interviews, two students stated their ultimate goal in learning English was to be able to communicate orally. However, what they studied in the program did not foster that and they started to be de-motivated going to class. Within the group of students with an increase in motivation, slightly more than half of the students were encouraged when their goals were reached. The majority of the rest were not quite sure and around 10% of them disagreed. Concerning the individual lessons in the program, their quality resulted in an increase or decrease in motivation as shown in figure 4.3. However, the majority of the participants stayed neutral over the issue. The same trend can be observed with regard to the relationship between the students’ motivation and their self and social image. If their performance did not make them or their friends or family disappointed about them, they could be motivated and vice versa. Yet, most students were uncertain about this. 4.3.2. Sense of autonomy and self-regulatory strategies To investigate the extent to which learners’ autonomy affect English learning motivation, students were asked to evaluate how their activeness in their own study was linked to changes in their motivation. Statistics (table 4.1) show that most students with a drop in motivation had difficulties determining what to learn and how to learn. On the other hand, over 65% of those with an increase in motivation did not feel sure that they have a high degree of autonomy to foster their learning. Only about 17% of them were confident about their learning autonomy and acknowledged its role in nurturing their motivation.
48

Table 4.1. Autonomy and learning motivation
strongly/moderately disagree Low degree of autonomy 9 11.25% 19 23.75% not s ure strongly/moderat ely agree 52 65% 80 100%

negat ively influenced learning motivation level High degree of autonomy

11 17.19%

42 65.62%

11 17.19%

64 100%

posit ively influenced learning motivation

Another factor, students’ self-regulatory strategies, which is closely linked to learner autonomy, was also investigated. Reponses from the students (figure 4.4) indicate a relative influence of goal setting skill on students’ motivation. Good goal setting skill helped to motivate more than 35% of the students in the increased motivation group,

whereas poor goal setting goal caused troubles to 45% of those in the other group. A very small number of students had the totally opposite idea. Most of them were not very sure about their goal setting skill and its influence on their motivation. The same situation can be seen concerning the matter of learning and self-motivating strategies. There is a link between good strategies and increased motivation and the other way round. Five interviewed students shared that they had difficulties monitoring their own learning when starting college. At high school, they were clearly instructed exactly what and how to learn; their goal was very clear: entering college. They were closely watched by their

49

Figure 4.4. Influe nce of se lf-re gulatory stra tegie s on motivational le ve l

increased motivation group
good learning and self- … good goal setting 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% good goal setting strongly/ slightly disagree slightly agree/disagree strongly/slightly agree 4.70% 59.40% 35.90% good learning and selfmotivating strategies 6.30% 51.50% 42.20%

decreased motivation group
poor learning and selfmotivating strategies poor goal setting 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% poor goal setting strongly/moderately disagree slightly agree/disagree strongly/moderately agree 1.25% 42.50% 45% poor learning and selfmotivating strategies 16.25% 40% 43.75%

teachers and parents. All of a sudden, college life was very d ifferent when they had to be in charge of their own learning, which made them puzzled. They were not prepared enough and did not know how to set goals in their studies, how to study in an effective way and how to motivate themselves. Four others did not have that much difficulty. They said that when feeling bored with learning, they did other things such as listening to music, reading books, watching movies or hanging out with friends. They came back to their studies when feeling good again. One
50

student of biology major had her own way of to motivate herself. She said, “biology books in English are much more interesting than those in Vietnamese. I set my mind that I must learn English to read books. Any time I am able to read something about biology in English, I feel very motivated.” 4.3.3. Teachers’ and parents’ influence In general, teachers’ and parents’ influence on the students’ motivation is reported as quite positive. Parents was found not exerting much pressure on the students. 48 out of 64 students with increased level of motivation agreed that their motivation had got higher partly because parents did not care too much about their grades. 61 out of 80 students with decreased level of motivation disagreed that their motivation went down because their parents put pressure on them. 109 students out of the surveyed population acknowledged their parents’ encouragement, which at least did not de-motivate them and even motivated them to learn more as for the students of increased motivation level. Table 4.2. Parents’ influence and motivation
strongly/moderat ely disagree Parents’ press ure on the st udents The students received from their 8 5.55% 27 18.75% 109 75.7% 144 100% created too much 118 81.94% 19 13.2% not s ure strongly/moderat ely agree 7 4.86% 144 100%

encouragem ent parents.

With regard to teachers’ part, the majority of the students did not have much complaint. In both group of the students, the percentage of
51

students acknowledging their teachers’ encouragement, friendliness and helpfulness is quite high (figure 4.5). 85% of the students with increased motivation group believed that their motivation had gone up partly because their teachers were very friendly, approachable and helpful. This positive reflection was also confirmed by 8 out of 10 interviewees of the study. The other two, who study in the same class, were not quite satisfied with all of their teachers claiming that a number of them came to class as a duty and just wanted to go through all the lessons and finish it on time. They did not really care whether the students could learn something from their lessons. Figure 4.5. Percentage of students acknowledging their teachers’ encouragement, friendliness, helpfulness and good teaching methods

decreased motivation group

increasedmotivation group

teachers' encouragement teachers' good teaching methods

teachers' friendliness and helpfulness

However, teaching methods of the teachers did not enjoy their students’ favor that much. Only about half of the students agreed that many of their teachers had appropriate teaching methods, which fostered their learning motivation. Most of the other half were not very convinced
52

100%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

0%

by their teachers’ methods, yet do not see it as problem for their learning motivation. Only 13 out of 64 students attributed their drop in motivation to their teachers’ inappropriate teaching methods which resulted in ineffective lessons. 4.3.4. Cooperation and competitiveness in class The atmosphere in a language classroom can have a part in fostering learning and motivation. It is also true for the participants of the research, yet it varies greatly from individual to individual. Concerning the matter of cooperation, 23 students of the increased motivation group agreed that their motivation went up because their class members were willing to help each other. 11 students of the other groups had the opposite experience being in classes where there was not good cooperation between class members. However, 38 others of the same group disagreed. Significantly, 69 students of the whole population (nearly 48%) were unsure about the influence of such factors.
Table 4.3. In-class coope ration and motivation
My moti vati on incre ase d because my class members are qui te cooperati ve. strongly/moderat ely not sure strongly/moderat ely Total students wit h increas ed motivation level disagree 3 4.7% 38 59.4% agree 23 35.9% 64 100%

students wit h decreas ed motivation level

My moti vation droppe d becau se my class members are not ve ry cooperati ve strongly/moderat ely not s ure strongly/moderat ely Total disagree 38 47.5% 31 38.75% agree 11 13.75% 80 100%

53

With regard to sense o f co mpetitiveness in class, no clear trend can be seen in the statistics. Good competitio n in class encouraged 23 students of the increased motivatio n group to learn harder. One student revealed in the interview that when his friends studied well, he wanted to try so that he wo uld no t be left behind. 11 stud ents o f the other gro up b lamed their drop in motivation on the low level of competiveness in their class. The majority o f both groups were no t very decid ed o ver the matter. Table 4.4. In-class competitiveness and motivation
My motivati on i ncre ase d because there is a good sense of good competi tion in m y class. strongly/moderat ely not s ure strongly/moderat ely T otal students wit h increas ed motivation level disagree 9 14.06% 40 62.5% agree 15 23.44% 64 100%

students wit h decreas ed motivation level

My motivati on droppe d be cau se there is n ot mu ch competition in my clas s strongly/moderat ely not s ure strongly/moderat ely T otal disagree 27 33.75% 31 38.75% agree 22 27.5% 80 100%

4.3.5. Influence of the learner group From the statistics, it seems that peer influence on students’ motivation varied greatly. Only 20 students out of 80 with a drop in motivation clearly felt that their friends cause them distraction. Interviews with two of them revealed that their friends often asked them to hang out or play games, which was a problem if an exam was approaching. They admitted that they could not resist the enjoyment of entertainment, which they found more interesting than learning English, especially when their achievement is not so great. 33 others denied negative peer influence on their motivation to learn English. One of them, in the interview with the researcher, shared that it was not because

54

of their friends’ distraction that his motivation went down. Instead, he gave himself to such distractions because he lost his motivation in learning at the time. The situation of the other group was quite different. Over 40% of them owed their rise in motivation to their friends’ encouragement and approximately 56% of them were uncertain. Only two students of this group disagreed over the issue.
Table 4.5. Peer influence and mo tivation
My motivati on i ncrease d because of peer en cou rageme nt strongly/moderat ely students wit h increas ed motivation level disagree 2 3.12% 36 56.25% not s ure strongly/moderat ely agree 26 40.63% 64 100% T otal

My motivati on dropped be cau se of peer distracti on students wit h decreas ed motivation level strongly/moderat ely disagree 33 41.25% 27 33.75% not s ure strongly/moderat ely agree 20 25% 80 100% T otal

4.3.6. Attributional factors Regarding attributional factors, the survey focused on whether the students believe they could have some control over their achievement and how that belief was linked to their drop or increase in motivation. Responses from the students suggest a difference between the two groups (table 4.6). As for the students with increased motivation level, nearly 86% of them believed they had control over their studies and that made them more motivated to learn. Significantly, no student of this group had the opposite idea. The rest of them were not quite sure about this.

55

In the other group, though there were not many, 12 students out of 80 felt helpless with their learning English believing that they could never reach the expected English level however hard they tried. It was because of this reason that they were de-motivated. This confirms what is said in attributional theory in psychology. 43.75% of the students did not have the same experience and the rest were not quite sure choosing the “slightly disagree” or “slightly agree” option.
Table 4.6. Attributional facto rs and motivation
My moti vation i ncre ased be cause I believe I can im prove with efforts an d commitmen t students wit h increased motivation level strongly/moderately disagree 0 0% 9 14.06% not sure strongly/moderat ely agree 55 85.94% 64 100% Total

Moti vati on dropped be cause I believe I can not reach the goal des pi te my efforts. students wit h decreas ed motivation level strongly/moderately disagree 35 43.75% 33 41.45% not sure strongly/moderat ely agree 12 15% 80 100% Total

Put together, the majority of the students felt they have some control over their studies and that made them more motivated or at least not de-motivated. However, the minority group of students who had the opposite experience and those who were not sure about the issue prove that students can be still vulnerable to such negative attributional style. 4.3.7. Self-concept beliefs Self-concept beliefs are basically about self-confidence and selfworth (i.e., one’s concern about how people perceive him or her) that

56

have been found in ESL/EFL research to have some impacts on students’ motivation. As for the participants of the study, 50% of the students with increased motivation agreed that their motivation to learn went up because they believed they had the ability to learn English. Only 6.25% of them disagreed and the rest were a little uncertain. The other group of students was not as homogenous as the former. 17.5% of them thought they d id not have the ability to learn English and their motivation went down as a result. Half of the rest disagreed and the other half stayed uncertain. This is also related to attributional factors and students with a pessimistic belief on their aptitude might become disheartened.
Table 4.7. Change of motivation due to students ’ be lie f in their English a ptitude
My moti vation i ncreased be cause of I am confi dent with my En glish aptitu de students wit h increased motivation level strongly/moderat ely disagree 4 6.25% 28 43.75% not s ure strongly/moderat ely agree 32 50% 64 100% Total

My moti vation droppe d becau se I am not con fi den t with my En glish aptitu de students wit h decreas ed motivation level strongly/moderat ely disagree 34 42.5% 32 40% not s ure strongly/moderat ely agree 14 17.5% 80 100% Total

Regarding self-worth, only 13 students (6 students with increased motivation) out of 144 participants of the research acknowledged the impact of their image in their friends' eyes on their motivation.

57

4.3.8. Received feedback, praise, grades Teachers’ feedback and praise did not seem to affect the students’ motivation much as only 23 students of the whole population, accounting for nearly 16%, clearly felt its influence. Noticeab ly, only three of them were of increased motivation group. The majority of the students were quite neutral over the issue.
Table 4.8. Received fee dback, praise and motivation
My moti vation i ncreased be cause I receive d good fee dback an d praises from my teache rs strongly/moderat ely not sure strongly/moderat ely T otal disagree 24 37.5% 37 57.8% agree 3 4.7% 64 100%

students wit h increased motivation level

students wit h decreas ed motivation level

My moti vati on droppe d because I di d not receive positive feedback and praises from my te achers frequen tly strongly/moderat ely not sure strongly/moderat ely T otal disagree 24 30% 36 45% agree 20 25% 80 100%

Table 4.9. G ra des and motivation
My motivati on i ncreased be cause of my good m arks . students wit h increased motivation level strongly/moderat ely disagree 24 37.5% 34 53.1% not sure strongly/moderat ely agree 6 9.4% 64 100% T otal

My motivati on dropped be cau se of uns atisfactory mark s. students wit h decreas ed motivation level strongly/moderat ely disagree 11 13.75% 27 33.75% not sure strongly/moderat ely agree 42 52.5% 80 100% T otal

Grades seemed to have a role in altering students’ motivation. Unsatisfactory marks made over half of the students in decreased motivation group de-motivated. 11 others out of 80 were not affected
58

and 27 were influenced somehow. For the other group, only six students confirmed the relationship between their good results and motivation. Half of them were not quite sure and 37.5% of them disagreed with the statement because they did not have many good marks. Six interviewed students claimed a discontent with the mismatch between what was learned in class and what was included in the test. They said that the tests were far more difficult than what they usually did during each module and that made them de-motivated. Summary With the presentation and d iscussion of the collected data, this chapter has consecutively provided answers to the three research questions. Major findings in detailed will be summarized in the conclusion, the final chapter of this research paper.

59

CHAPTER 5. CONCLUSION
Previous chapters have involved the introduction, the literature review, the realization and the findings of the study. Lastly, this final chapter will summarize and evaluate the findings of the whole research by summing up the findings, drawing some implications and acknowledging contribution and limitations of the research as well as putting forward several suggestions for further studies. 5.1. Summary of major findings The study was conducted with a population of 144 students of the Strategic Mission Project with the primary aim to investigate the students’ motivation to learn English and factors that alter it. Through analys is of data obtained from the questionnaire and semi-structured interviews, some major findings are summarized as follows. First, students’ motivation to learn English has been found to be a combination of various motivation orientations that have been defined in L2 motivation research, namely: intrinsic, extrinsic (or instrumental) and integrative orientation. Among those, extrinsic orientation seemed to play the most dominant part as most students’ ultimate goals when learning English are to pass examinations, to have better education opportunities and later get good jobs. This result is in line with results of previous research on different populations in Vietnam. Second, more than half of the participants reported a drop in motivation. Though full generalization cannot be made to the whole population, such ratio is quite alarming, which raises an issue that needs serious attention.

60

Finally, by examining the two groups of students, one with increased motivation and one with decreased motivation, factors that caused such changes have been found. All nine groups of factors presented in the process model of L2 motivation (actional and postactional stage) had certain influences on students’ change in motivation. As for the group of increased motivation, it is not clear which factor had the strongest influence as statistics show that it varied from ind ividual to individual. For the other group, clearer generalization can be made. Parents and teachers are definitely not the root of their drop in motivation as the majority of them acknowledged support from their parents and teachers and very few denied it. Three biggest sources of de-motivation seem to be inappropriateness of the syllabi, the lack of self-regulatory strategies and low grades. The researcher has been able to gain some insights into the students’ dissatisfaction with the syllabi with an open-ended question. Such information provides important reference for both future teachers and managers of the project. 5.2. Implications As mentioned in the introduction part, underlying the conduction of the research is the researcher’s desire to help future students of the project to avoid any obstacles that current students might have in maintaining their motivation to learn English. With the support of the above-mentioned findings, several implications can be drawn as follows: (1) The design of the English program for students of the project needs to be carefully reconsidered with regard to the students’ level of English. In fact, students started as beginners are hardly expected to reach the required level of the program. This is also suggested by the students
61

themselves. As a result, a serious consideration should be made over the minimum required English level for students to enroll in the program. (2) Teachers and the authorities concerned should try to help students to get adapted to college life. The transition from high school to college is not to be underestimated especially when students have to cope with an intens ive English program, totally different from their prior experience. One idea is that a number of experienced teachers can be designated to be advisors for students in case they need advice to cope with their difficulties. (3) Apart from teaching English, teachers of the project should also spare some part of their lessons sharing learning strategies with students. (4) Teachers can help to eliminate any negative attributional idea of the students such as “I do not have the ability” or “I would not get better no matter how I try”. (5) It is a good idea that teachers pay more attention to the ind ividual differences as the population in each class is not highly homogeneous: students are of different majors and their interests can diverse greatly. (6) Students should be encouraged to share with each other their secret to maintain motivation and any effective learning strategies. Clubs can be a good channel through which students can share learning experience. The existing club in the dorm or the English Club (EC) of ULIS should be made use of. 5.3. Contribution of the study Being the first formal research on motivation of students of Strategic Mission project in ULIS, results of the research can be
62

considered as a source of reference for both teachers of ULIS who involve in teaching those students as well as the management board of the project. To be more specific, the research gives an understanding of the students’ motivation which is expected to be useful for teachers in facilitating learning of their students. From a more macro level, necessary changes in curriculum design as well as criteria to accept students to the project might be considered by the authorities concerned in accordance with the research’s implications. 5.4. Limitations of the study Despite the researchers’ efforts, there exist a number of limitations in the study due to time pressure and the lack of resources. Three major shortcomings are discussed below. In the first place, because the research aims to look at as many factors as possible that affect students’ motivation to learn English, it was not possible within an undergraduate paper to get into further detail of some factors that were found to play an important part. For example, a lot of the participants were discontented with the design of their English program, yet the researcher was only able to get some quick general comments from the students on what made the program problematic to them. In the second place, though the students provide probably the most reliable information on their motivation, some information regard ing what actually happened in class should also be investigated from the perspective of their teachers and by classroom observation as well. The third drawback comes from the fact that the English program is broken down into different parts and lasts for nine months.
63

Throughout the period, a student can experience different phases where their motivation can go up or down continuously and the role of the motivational factors can vary accordingly. As a result, the research is not able to provide a more detailed picture of what happen in shorter phases. That requires a longitudinal research and a case approach. 5.5. Recommendations for further research Given the limitations of the research, some implications for further research can be drawn. First, a longitud inal research can be done with a smaller number of participants so that the detailed development of learning motivation over one year can be observed. A case or multip lecase research approach to the issue would allow more insightful investigation. An interested researcher might, for instance, keep a record on changes of some students’ motivation after each module of the project. Another idea is to examine the issue from multip le perspectives, from the students, from their teachers and even their family. This again can only possible with a small number of participants. Results of this research have pointed out two main areas that the students feel problematic, i.e. the design of the English program as well their own learning and self-regulatory strategies. This draws two research directions. On the one hand, one can conduct a research to evaluate the English program for students of the Strategic Mission Project so that improvements to the program can be made. Moreover, quite a d irect link between the students’ learning motivation and suitab ility of the program to their English level can be seen from findings of the research. On the other hand, a study can be carried out to

64

find out the strategies students of the project use in order to regulate their motivation and any difficulties they might have.

65

REFERENCES
Cohen, L., Manion, L. & Morrison, K. (2007). Research methods in Education. New York: Routledge Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-

determination in human behavior. New York: Plenum.
Deci, E. L., Connell, J. P., & Ryan, R.M. (1989). Self-determination in a work organization. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 580-590. Deci, E. L., Vallerand, R. J., Pelletier, L. G., & Ryan, R. M. (1991). Motivation and Education: the self-determination perspective.

Educational Psychologist, 26 (3&4), 325-346.
Dornyei, Z. (1998). Survey Article: Motivation in second and foreign language learning. Language Teaching, 31, 117-135. Dornyei, Z. (2001). Motivational strategies in the language classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge Univers ity Press. Dornyei, Z. (2005). The psychology of the language learner: Individual

differences in second language acquisition . Mahwah, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum. Dornyei, Z., & Otto, I. (1998). Motivation in action: A process model of L2 motivation. Working Papers in Applied Linguistics (Thames

Valley University), 4, 43-69.
Gagné, M., & Deci, E. L. (2005). Self-determination theory and work motivation. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 26, 331-362.

66

Gardner, R. C. (1985). Social psychology and second language learning:

The role of attitudes and motivation. London, GB: Edward
Arnold. Gardner, R. C. (2005). Integrative motivation and second language acquisition. Joint Plenary Talk. London, Canada: Canadian Association of Applied Linguistics. Gardner, R. C. (2010). Motivation and second language acquisition: the

socio-educational model. New York: Peter Lang Publishing, Inc.
Gardner, R. C., & Lambert, W. E. (1972). Attitudes and motivation in

second language learning. Rowley, Mass: Newbury House.
Gardner, R. C., & Smythe, P. C. (1975). Motivation and secondlanguage acquisition. The Canadian Modern Language Review , 31, 218-230. Graham, S., & Weiner, B. (1996). Theories and princip les of motivation. In D. C. Berliner & R. C. Calfee (Eds.), Handbook of educational

psychology (pp. 63-84). New York, NY: Simon & Schuster
McMillan. Guilloteaux, M. J. (2007). Motivating Language Learners: A Classroom-

Oriented Investigation of Teachers’ Motivational Practices and Students’ motivation .
(Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Nottingham, UK. Hoang, D.N. (2009). Motivation in learning English speaking of the

second year tourism major students at tourism and foreign language department, Sao Do College of Industry. (Unpublished
master’s minor thesis). Vietnam National University, Hanoi.
67

Hoang, T.N. (2006). Motivating students to speak at Gia Loc senior

secondary school. (Unpublished master’s minor thesis). Vietnam
Nationl University, Hano i. Keblawi, F. (2009). A Critical Appraisal of Language Learning Motivation Theories. Proceedings of the Fifth International

Biennial Self Research Conference. Dubai.
Krause, K. L., Bochner, S., & Duchesne, S. (2006). Educational

Psychology for Learning and Teaching. (2
Cengage Learning Australia.

nd

ed.) Australia:

Learned Help lessness. (2001). In Encyclopedia of Childhood and

Adolescence.
9/

Retrieved

February

18,

2010

from

http://findartic les.com/p/articles/mi_g2602/is_0003/ai_260200034

Lightbown, M. P., & Spada, N. (1999). How Languages are Learned (Revised ed.). China: Oxford University Press. Luu, T.L. (2008). Factors affecting motivation in learning speaking

English of grade 10 students at Yendinh 1 high school.
(Unpublished master’s minor thesis). Vietnam National University, Hano i. Mackey, A., & Gass, S. M. (2005). Second Language Research: Methodology and Design. London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Mclnerney, D. M., & Mclnerney, V. (2006). Educational psychology:

Constructing learning. (4 ed.) Australia: Pearson Prentice Hall.
Nguyen, T.P.L. (2008). Factors affecting English non-major first-year

th

students’ motivation in learning reading skills at Hanoi University
68

of industry. (Unpublished master’s minor thesis). Vietnam
National University, Hanoi. Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000a). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrins ic motivation, social development, and wellbeing. American Psychologist, 55, 68-78. Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2009). Promoting self-determined school engagement: Motivation, learning and well-being. In K. R. Wentzel & A. Wigfield (Eds.), Handbook of motivation at school (pp.171-195). New York & London: Routledge. Ryan, R.M., &. Deci, E. L. (2000b). Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivation: Classic Definition and New Directions.

Contemporary

Educational Psychology, 25, 54-67.
Tran, T.T.X. (2007). Motivation in learning speaking skills (for second-

year non-English majors at Hanoi University of Education.
(Unpublished master’s minor thesis). Vietnam National University, Hano i. Wigfield, A., & Eccles, J. S. (2000). Expectancy-value theory of achievement motivation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 68-81. Zimmerman, B. J., & Kitsantas, A. (1999). Acquiring writing vers ion skill: Shifting from process to outcome self-regulatory goals.

Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 1-10.

69

APPENDICES
APPENDIX 1 – QUESTIONNAIRE FOR STUDENTS
STUDENTS’ PERCEPTION ON FACTORS AFFECTING ENGLISH LEARNING MOTIVATION OF STUDENTS IN STRATEGIC MISSION PROJECT AT ULIS, VNU
Dear student, I am Nguyen Nhue Giang, a 4th year student from class 07.1.E1 at FELTE, ULIS. I am doing my thesis to investigate the factors affecting learning motivation of students in strategic mission project at ULIS, VNU from students’ perspective. I would be grateful if you could spare some time to do this survey for me. All of your information and opinions will be kept strictly confidential. The survey takes approximately 15 minutes. Thank you very much for time and contribution. If you have any questions regarding the study, please contact me at

giangnguyen1988@gmail.com or reach me at 0983112403 PART I: Personal information (This is known to the researcher only and for the researcher to contact you for further information)

- Full name...................................................................................................................................... - Gender: Male / Female - Your major: .................................................................................................................................. - Cell phone number: ....................................................................................................................... - Email address: ..............................................................................................................................

Motivation to learn English is a phenomenon shown through persistence and constant effort, desire to achieve mastery of English and enjoyment of English learning process

70

PART II: Questions

For each question below, please tick the option that best expresses your opinion.
Questions Re asons to le arn Englis h 1 2 3 4 5 6

1 2 3 4 5 Strongly Moderately Slightly Slightly Moderately disagree disagree disagree agree agree 1. I study English because I enjoy studying it. 2. I study English because I need to pass the examinations in order to move to the next year of my program. 3. I study English for better education opportunities. 4. I study English for better career opportunities. 5. I study English because I want to be able to speak to foreigners and make friends with them. 6. I study English because I want to understand about cultures and people of English-speaking countries.
Do you have any other re asons to learn Englis h? (please specify)

6 Strongly agree

....................................................................................................................................................... ....................................................................................................................................................... ....................................................................................................................................................... .......................................................................................................................................................
Do you have any other comme nts?

....................................................................................................................................................... ....................................................................................................................................................... ....................................................................................................................................................... .......................................................................................................................................................

Ques tions Le vel of motivation 1 Ve ry low 2 Low 3 Average 4 High 1 2 3 4 5

5 Ve ry high

7. My motivation to learn English at the beginning of the program. 8. My motivation to learn English now.
If you find your motivation has incre ased or s tay the same at leve l 3 or 4 or 5, ple ase do questions from 9a to 30a. If you find your motivation has decrease d or s tay the same at level 1 or 2, ple ase do questions from 9b to 30b.

71

Questions Factors leadin g to increased le vel of moti vati on 1 2 3 4 5 6

1 2 3 4 5 Strongly M oderat ely Slight ly Slight ly Moderately disagree disagree disagree agree agree MY MOT IVAT IO N HAS INCREAS ED BECAUS E: 1 9a T he sy llabi of my Englis h program m eet my exp ect ations (suitable for m e) 10a I enjoy m ost of the English les sons in my program. They are int erest ing. 11a T he English program has helped me t o reach my goal(s ) of studying Englis h. 12a I have been able to solve problems encount ered while learning Englis h. 13a My performance has not made me disappointed about my learning ability. 14a My performance has not made my family or friends dis appointed about my learning ability. 15a I am very act ive in learning Englis h. I am clear about w hat and how I should learn. 16a I get encouragement from my parents in my studies. 17a My parents do not creat e stres s on me about my res ults. 18a Many of my t eachers always encourage me to learn. 19a Many of my t eachers are friendly, approachable and helpful. 20a Many of my t eachers have good m et hods and provide me with effect ive less ons. 21a Most of our class members are willing to help each other to learn. 22a T here is a good sense of good competition in my class. 23a My peers have good influence on me. T hey encourage and m otivat e m e to learn. 24a I know how to s et goals for my study. 25a I have good learning strategies and I know how to mot ivat e mys elf to strive for the goals. 26a I am confident about my ability to learn English. 27a My classmat es have a high opinion of my p erformance and achievement. 28a I believe that with efforts and commitment , I can improve my English even if my current level of English is not good. 29a I have received good praises and feedback from my teachers. 30a My grades are good m ost of the time.

2

6 St rongly agree 3 4 5

6

If you disagree with item 9a, please in di cate whether the program h as met you r expe ctation. If it does n ot, please s pe cify the reas on s. (e.g. it’s too difficult or e asy for you) ......................................................................................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................................................................................... Are there any other factors that hel p to in cre ase you r m oti vation ? Please s pecify. You can also add an y other comments.

....................................................................................................................................................... ....................................................................................................................................................... .......................................................................................................................................................

72

Questions Factors leadin g to decrease d le vel of moti vation 1 2 3 4 5 6

1 2 3 4 5 Strongly M oderat ely Slight ly Slight ly Moderately disagree disagree disagree agree agree MY MOT IVAT IO N HAS DECREAS ED BECAUS E: 1 9b The sy llabi of my Englis h program do not meet my exp ect ations (not suitable for me) 10b I do not enjoy m ost of the Englis h lessons in my program. They are not int eresting enough. 11b The English program has not help ed me to reach my goal(s) of studying Englis h. I haven’t improved enough. 12b I have not been able to solve problem s encountered while learning English. 13b My performance has made me dis appointed about my learning ability. 14b My performance has made my family and friends disappoint ed about my learning ability. 15b I am not very active in learning English. I am not clear about what and how I should learn. 16b I do not get much encouragement from my parents in my studies. 17b My parents create too much st ress on m e about my res ults. 18b Many of my teachers DO N OT always encourage me to learn. 19b Many of my teachers are NOT friendly, approachable or helpful enough. 20b Many of my teachers DO N OT have good met hods or provide me wit h effective less ons. 21b Not many members in my clas s are not willing to help each other to learn. 22b There isn’t m uch competition in my clas s. Many people do not really care about learning. 23b My peers make me more distracted from my studies. 24b I don’t know how to s et goals for my st udy. 25b I lack good learning strategies and I don’t know how t o m otivat e mys elf to study. 26b I think I don’t have t he ability to learn Englis h. 27b My classmat es have a low opinion of my p erformance and achievement. 28b I feel like whatever I do and how much I try, I can’t improve my English up to the exp ect ed level. 29b I seldom get prais es or posit ive feedback from my teachers. I don’t think I’m a good st udent. 30b My grades are not good most of the t ime.

2

6 St rongly agree 3 4 5

6

If you agree with item 9b, please spe cify why the program does not meet your expectation (e.g. it’s too di ffi cult or easy for you) ......................................................................................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................................................................................... Are the re any other factors th at have lowere d you r motivati on level? Please s pe cify. You can also add any other comments . ......................................................................................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................................................................................... .........................................................................................................................................................................................................

73

PHI U ðI U TRA DÀNH CHO SINH VIÊN
NH N TH C C A SINH VIÊN V CÁC NHÂN T NH HƯ NG T I H NG THÚ H C TI NG ANH C A SINH VIÊN THU C CHƯƠNG TRÌNH NHI M V CHI N LƯ C T I ð I H C NGO I NG , ð I H C QU C GIA HÀ N I

Các b n sinh viên thân m n, Tôi là Nguy n Nhu Giang, sinh viên năm 4, l p 07.1.E1, Khoa Sư ph m Ti ng Anh, ðHNN. Tôi ñang làm khóa lu n nghiên c u v các nhân t nh hư ng t i h ng thú h c ti ng Anh c a sinh viên thu c chương trình nhi m v chi n lư c t i ð i h c Ngo i ng , ð i h c qu c gia Hà n i t góc nhìn c a chính ngư i h c. Mong các b n có th dành kho ng 15 phút ñ hoàn thành phi u ñi u tra sau c a tôi. T t c thông tin và ý ki n c a các b n s ñư c b o m t tuy t ñ i. N u có b t c th c m c nào liên quan ñ n nghiên c u này, các b n có th liên h v i tôi qua ñ a ch email: giangnguyen1988@gmail.com ho c s ñi n tho i 0983112403. C m ơn s ñóng góp c a b n!
PH N I: Thông tin cá nhân

Xin các b n vui lòng cung c p nh ng thông tin sau ñ tôi có th liên l c khi c n thêm thông tin. Các b n có th yên tâm v tính b o m t c a thông tin các b n cung c p cho tôi. - Tên: ............................................................................................................................................. - Gi i tính: Nam/ N - Ngành h c: ................................................................................................................................... - ði n tho i di ñ ng: ........................................................................................................................ - ð a ch email: ...............................................................................................................................

Lưu ý: H ng thú h c ti ng Anh ñư c th hi n qua n l c h c, ñ kiên trì h c, mong mu n h c t t ti ng Anh và ñ thích thú khi h c.

PH N II: Câu h i kh o s át

ðánh d u ( ) cho l a ch n th hi n rõ nh t quan ñi m c a b n trong m i câu dư i ñây:

74

Câu h i Lý do h c ti ng Anh 1 2 3 4 5 6

1 2 3 4 5 R t không Tương ñ i Hơi không Hơi ñúng Tương ñ i ñúng không ñúng ñúng ñúng 1. Tôi h c ti ng Anh vì tôi th y ti ng Anh r t hay. Tôi c m th y thích h c. 2. Tôi h c ti ng Anh vì tôi c n vư t qua các kỳ thi ñ ñ ñi u ki n h c ti p h c a mình. 3. Tôi h c ti ng Anh vì tôi mu n nói chuy n ñư c và làm quen v i ngư i nư c ngoài 4. Tôi h c ti ng Anh vì ñ có các cơ h i h c t p t t hơn 5. Tôi h c ti ng Anh vì ñ có các cơ h i vi c làm t t hơn 6. Tôi h c ti ng Anh vì tôi mu n tìm hi u v văn hóa và con ngư i các nư c nói ti ng Anh
B n có lý do nào khác khi h c ti ng Anh không? (Xin nêu rõ)

6 R t ñúng

....................................................................................................................................................... ....................................................................................................................................................... ....................................................................................................................................................... ....................................................................................................................................................... .......................................................................................................................................................
B n có ý ki n/nh n xét nào khác không?

....................................................................................................................................................... ....................................................................................................................................................... ....................................................................................................................................................... ....................................................................................................................................................... .......................................................................................................................................................
Câu h i M c ñ h ng thú h c ti ng Anh 1 R t th p 2 Th p 3 Trung bình 4 Cao 1 2 3 4 5

5 R t cao

7. H ng thú h c ti ng Anh c a tôi lúc b t ñ u chương trình 8. H ng thú h c ti ng Anh c a tôi hi n nay
N u m c ñ h ng thú c a b n tăng lên, ho c gi nguyên câu h i 9a ñ n 30a N u m c ñ h ng thú c a b n gi m ñi, ho c gi nguyên 9b ñ n 30b. m c 3, 4 ho c 5 hãy tr l i m c 1, 2 hãy tr l i câu h i

75

Câu h i Các nh ân t giú p tăn g m c ñ h n g thú 1 R t không ñúng 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 3 4 5 T ương ñ i Hơi không Hơi ñúng Tương ñ i không ñúng ñúng ñúng H NG THÚ H C TI NG ANH C A TÔI TĂNG LÊN V Ì: 1 9a Chư ơng trình h c ti ng Anh ñúng như mong ñ i (phù h p v i c a tôi). 10a T ôi thích ph n l n các bu i h c trong chương trình, chúng r t thú v . 11a Chư ơng trình ti ng Anh giúp t ôi ñ t ñư c m c tiêu h c ti ng Anh c a mình. 12a T ôi ñã có th gi i quy t các v n ñ g p ph i trong quá trình h c ti ng Anh t i trư ng. 13a K t qu h c t p c a t ôi không làm b n t hân tôi th t v ng v năng l c h c t p c a mình. 14a K t qu h c t p c a t ôi không làm gia ñình hay b n bè th t v ng v năng l c h c t p c a tôi. 15a T ôi r t ch ñ ng trong vi c h c ti ng Anh. Tôi bi t mình nên h c cái gì và h c như th nào. 16a T ôi ñư c b m ñ ng viên trong h c t p. 17a B m tôi không gây nhi u áp l c cho tôi v k t qu h c t p. 18a ða s giáo viên d y t ôi luôn khuy n khích, ñ ng viên s inh viên trong h c t p. 19a ða s giáo viên d y t ôi ñ u t hân thi n, d ti p c n và s n s àng giúp ñ s inh viên. 20a ða s các giáo viên d y t ôi có phư ơng pháp d y t t và mang ñ n cho sinh viên nh ng bài h c hi u qu . 21a H u h t m i ngư i trong l p t ôi luôn s n s àng giúp ñ nhau trong h c t p. 22a T rong l p tôi có không khí thi ñua h c t p t t. 23a B n bè có nh hư ng t t ñ i v i t ôi. H ñ ng viên và thúc ñ y tôi t rong h c t p. 24a T ôi bi t cách ñ t ra các m c tiêu trong h c t p. 25a T ôi bi t t t o ñ ng l c h c t p cho mình ñ ñ t ñư c nh ng m c t iêu ñ ra. 26a T ôi tin r ng mình có kh năng h c t i ng Anh. 27a B n cùng l p ñánh giá cao năng l c và thành tích h c t p c a t ôi 28a T ôi tin r ng n u n l c, chăm ch thì k t qu h c t p s t t, k c n u hi n nay chưa t t. 29a T ôi ñã nh n ñư c các l i khen và nh n xét t t t phía giáo viên. 30a ði m s c a tôi h u như là t t.

6 R t ñúng 2 3 4 5 6

N u b n th y câu 9a k hông ñú ng (b t c m c ñ nào), b n hãy cho bi t ch ương trình có n hư b n mong ñ i không? N u k hông thì vì sao (ch ng h n nh ư vì chươn g trìn h quá khó/ quá d so v i trình ñ c a b n)? ......................................................................................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................................................................................... B n còn th y có y u t n ào khác giú p b n tăng h ng thú h c ti ng Anh? (nêu rõ). N u b n có thêm ý ki n / nh n xét nào khác xin cũn g nêu rõ. ......................................................................................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................................................................................... .........................................................................................................................................................................................................

76

Câu h i Các y u t d n ñ n gi m m c ñ h n g thú 1 R t không ñúng 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 3 4 5 T ương ñ i Hơi không Hơi ñúng Tương ñ i không ñúng ñúng ñúng H NG THÚ H C TI NG ANH C A TÔI GI M ð I VÌ: 1 9b Chư ơng trình h c không như t ôi mong ñ i, không p hù h p v i tôi. 10b Tôi không thích h u h t các bài h c trong chư ơng trình. C húng không ñ h p d n. 11b Chư ơng trình h c không giúp t ôi ñ t ñư c các m c tiêu h c ti ng Anh c a mình. Tôi không ti n b ñư c nhi u l m. 12b Tôi thư ng không bi t cách gi i quy t các v n ñ g p ph i trong quá trình h c ti ng Anh. 13b K t qu h c c a tôi làm b n thân t ôi th t v ng v năng l c h c t âp c a m ình. 14b K t qu h c c a tôi làm gia ñình và b n bè th t v ng v năng l c h c tâp c a tôi. 15b Tôi không ch ñ ng l m trong h c t p. Tôi không bi t mình nên h c gì và h c như th nào. 16b Tôi không nh n ñư c nhi u s ñ ng viên t b m trong h c t p. 17b B m gây cho tôi nhi u áp l c v k t qu h c t p. 18b Nhi u giáo viên d y t ôi không khuy n khích, ñ ng viên sinh viên trong h c t p. 19b Nhi u giáo viên d y t ôi không thân thi n, khó ti p c n và không s n s àng giúp ñ s inh viên. 20b Nhi u giáo viên d y t ôi không có phương p háp d y t t d n ñ n các bài h c không ñư c hi u qu . 21b Trong l p, không có nhi u ngư i s n s àng giúp ñ nhau trong h c t p. 22b L p không có không khí thi ñua t t. Nhi u b n không th c s quan tâm ñ n vi c h c. 23b B n bè khi n tôi s ao nhãng hơn trong h c t p. 24b Tôi không bi t cách ñ ra các m c tiêu h c t p. 25b Tôi không bi t làm th nào ñ t t o ñ ng l c h c cho b n t hân. 26b Tôi nghĩ tôi không có kh năng h c t i ng Anh. 27b B n cùng l p ñánh giá th p năng l c và k t qu h c t p c a tôi. 28b Tôi c m t h y cho dù có c g ng th nào ñi n a, trình ñ ti ng Anh c a tôi cũng s không ñ t ñư c m c c n thi t. 29b Tôi ít khi nh n ñư c l i khen ng i hay nh n xét t ích c c t các giáo viên. Tôi nghĩ mình không ph i là m t sinh viên gi i. 30b ði m s c a tôi thư ng không t t.

6 R t ñúng 2 3 4 5 6

N u b n th y câu 9b ñún g (b t c m c ñ nào), b n hãy cho bi t vì sao ch ương trình không ñư c nh ư b n mong ñ i (ch ng h n nh ư vì ch ươ ng trình qu á khó/ quá d so v i trình ñ c a b n). ......................................................................................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................................................................................... B n còn th y có lí do n ào kh ác làm b n gi m h ng thú h c ti ng Anh ? (nêu rõ) N u b n có thêm ý ki n/ nh n xé t nào khác xin cũ ng nê u rõ. ......................................................................................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................................................................................... .........................................................................................................................................................................................................

77

APPENDIX 2
SAMPLE OF QUESTIONS FOR SEMI-STRUCTURED INTERVIEWS

**Note: Questions in each interview varied in accordance to the information each participant provided in the questionnaires. •
Among six reasons to learn English, what are the top ones? Can you further comments? Did you know it from the beginning or you came to realize it later?

In the questionnaire, you agreed that your motivation decreased because the syllabi did not meet your expectation. Is that right? Why is that?

Did you have difficulty coping with problems that arose? Did that de-motivate you to learn English?

• •

Did your parents put any pressure on you? You agreed that your friends distracted you from learning and your motivation decreased. Can you tell me more about that?

How do you feel about your English aptitude? Does that affect your learning motivation?

• • •

Did unsatisfactory mark d iscourage you to learn English? Did you often receive feedback or praises from your teachers? Do you have any suggestions or comments for further improvement of the program?

78

APPENDIX 3
SAMPLE TRANSCRIPT OF THE INTERVIEWS (VIETNAMESE VERSION)
Ngư i ng hiê n c u: (N NC)

Sinh viê n: (SV)

NNC:

SV:

NNC: SV:

NNC: SV:

NNC: SV: NNC: SV: NNC:

Ch mu n h i em m t s câu h i thêm thôi và yên tâm là nh ng thông tin này ch có ch nghe mà thôi. Lý do mà ch mu n p h ng v n em là b i vì em có report l i trong questio nnaire này là h ng thú h c c a em tăng, t c là ñ tăng c a em là nhi u. ð u năm thì r t th p nhưng ñ n bây gi thì thu c lo i cao. Ch ch mu n h i thông tin thêm m t chút. ð u tiên thì h i v m y lí do h c ti ng Anh c a em y. Tro ng này em có ñ c p ñ n 2 lí do mà có l là quan tr ng nh t ñây, ñ y là h c ti ng Anh ñ có các cơ h i h c t p và cơ h i vi c làm t t hơn. Vì thì lí do này c a em ý, thì em có ngay t ñ u năm, em t bi t ñ i u ñ ó hay là sau này thì em m i c m th y ñư c cái lý do này? Th c ra lý do này thì em b i t ngay t ñ u năm . Bây gi thì th c ra h c ngành gì cũng ph i quan tr ng ti ng Anh. Ngành c a em, ñ c bi t là k hi em ñ ăng kí vào chương trình tiên ti n này thì em th y ti ng Anh r t q uan tr ng . Còn hai lý do n a cũng là lý do mà em th y là nó hay và em mu n tìm hi u hơn v văn hóa co n ngư i nhưng em l i không cho r ng lí do này quan tr ng b ng lí do khác. Em có thêm comment hay gi i thích gì không? Th c ra thì, v cái văn hóa này thì, , em cũng chưa tìm hi u l m hi u l m, em cũng không thích ñ c sách l m. H c v các văn hóa này ch y u h c q ua các phương ti n truy n thông và em thích tìm hi u v văn hóa c a nư c mình hơn. Ok. Nhưng em cũng khá là mu n làm quen và nói chuy n ñ ư c v i ngư i nư c ngoài? T t nhiên . H c ti ng Anh r t là thích biêt nói, ñ c bi t là sau này h c giáo trình ti ng Anh thì t t nhiên là mu n phát bi u b ng ti ng Anh, nói chuy n v i th y giáo b ng ti ng Anh r i. V y thì em có gi i thích ñ ư c vì sao mà ñ u năm h ng thú h c c a em k hông dư c cao l m nh ? B i vì ngay t c p 3 em ñã k hông thích h c ti ng Anh l m r i vì phương p háp gi ng d y và cách h c c a mình k hông thích h p. Cho nên em k hông thích. Cho nên là t cái thói q uen y nên là ñ u năm mình k hông th y thích. Không thích h c l m? Vâng Ok. Th nhưng mà sau m t th i gian h c thì c m th y là mình. Ít nh t ñây em ñ là cao, nghĩa là k há là thích, ñúng không? Vâng Thì ch mu n h i thêm v m t s các y u t mà khi n cho em thích. Th nh t là v chương trình h c. ñây chương trình h c ñ úng như mong ñ i, tương ñ i như mo ng ñ i c a em. Như v y thì em th y nó 79

SV:

NNC:

SV: NNC: SV:

NNC: SV: NNC: SV: NNC:

SV:

NNC: SV: NNC: SV: NNC: SV:

NNC: SV: NNC: SV: NNC: SV: NNC: SV:

như th nào? Có th y khó hay như th nào k hông? Không, em th y chương trình k há là ñ ơn gi n, ñ i t trình ñ cơ b n lên nên em cũng khá n m b t ñ ư c. Có ñ i u mình chưa th c s hi u kĩ ch y u là do mình còn lư i, cho nên chưa hi u kĩ hơn. Nhưng mà bư c chuy n t ch h c p h n A2 lên B1 thì có m t s b n ch nói chuy n nói là nh y t ch ñ y, hêt A2 lên B1 ý, thì là B1 khó hơn h n. Em có th y ñ i u ñ ó không ? .. B1 có thêm quy n Interactio ns, ñ úng k hông nh ? Thêm m t chút v IELTS r i. Em có tháy là nó hơ i nhanh không ? Cũng có . B i vi bài nó dài hơ n, nhi u t m i hơn nên là mình tháy khó. Như ng th c ra thì n i d ung v n hay. M i t i là có nhi u t m i mình k hông b t k p. Cái vi c ñó có nh hư ng t i vi c em thích h c hay là ñ ng l c c a em thay ñ i ? Nó giúp mình là mình ph i h c nhi u t m i hơn ñ có th hi u bài. T c là ph i c hơn ñ ñ t ñ ư c cái mình c n, ñ úng không ? Vâng Trong này thì em không cho r ng các bu i h c thú v l m, thì, à, ñây em k há là k hen chương trình h c và giáo trình, v y thì cái ñ i u không thú v này có p h i t i giáo viên k hông ? hay là ? Giáo viên thì giáo viên cũng r t là nhi t tình nhưng mà ch ng qu l p mình nó không h ng thú nên kéo theo c mình và nó t o lên tâm lý c a c l p. Th nên là các b n k hông h ng thú mình cũng không c m th y h ng thú gì n a. , à. Nhưng t c là ý mu n nói là các bu i h c em không th y thú v l m là vì m i ngư i r t là tr m tr m à ? Vâng, m i ngư i r t tr m. T c là không ph i là t i vì ho t ñ ng c a cô không hay ñ úng không ? Vâng Trong quá trình h c, thì em có c m th y mình g p nhi u khó khăn, hay là gì ñó không ? Trong quá trình h c thì em c m th y mình g p nhi u khó khăn. Th nh t là cái các k ĩ năng còn chưa ñư c thành th o mà nh t là kĩ năng nghe thì mình ñã kém r i sau ñó r i cái s kém c a mình l i khi n cho mình k hông thích h c th ñâm ra càng không phát tri n ñư c kĩ năng y c a mình. Em có g p k hó k hăn trong vi c tìm ra cách h c k hông ? Có a. R t nhi u k hó k hăn. Em ñánh giá th nào v kh năng gi i quy t các v n ñ ñ ó c a em ? Em có gi i quy t ñư c ñ n ñâu ? Ph n l n thì t c là em gi i quy t ñ ư c m c khá ý so v i các v n ñ c a mình. V các k ĩ năng thì cũng phát tri n hơn là nhi u. T c là em t luy n t p ? Vâng, t luy n t p và cũng có h c h i dư c kĩ năng c a các b n. Tuy nhiên nhi u khi h i nhi u q uá ñ âm ra b r i. T c là v m t phương p háp h c em cũng ñ i tham kh o các b n và em có th y hi u q u không ? V p hương pháp h c thì có nhi u hi u qu l m như ng mà cái kĩ năng

80

NNC:

SV:

NNC: SV: NNC: SV: NNC: SV: NNC: SV: NNC:

SV:

NNC: SV: NNC: SV: NNC:

SV:

NNC: SV: NNC:

SV: NNC:

nào mà mình tháy thích thì mình th y hi u q u , mình theo ñư c hư ng c a b n còn v kĩ năng nào mình k hông thích thì b n g i ý cho mình như ng mình v n k hông theo ñư c. Trong này ch có m t câu là k t qu h c t p c a tôi không làm b n thân tôi th t v ng và em không ñ ng ý v i câu này. ði u ñ y có nghĩa là em th t v ng v i năng l c h c t p c a em à ? D ñ úng . Ví d như là kĩ năng nói ch ng h n, trên l p mình cũng nói t t nhưng khi làm bài ki m tra thì k hông bao gi ñư c ñ i m cao. Kĩ năng nghe thì cũng th . Thì c m th y hơi th t v ng ? Vâng. Th vi c ñó có làm cho em c m th y b t thích h c ñi không ? th y n n ñ i không ? ðôi lúc thì có. Tuy nhiên thì b n bè và gia ñ ình thì không th t v ng gì ? Vâng. Gia ñ ình em k hông gây ra áp l c gì c ? Luôn k huy n khích và ng h ? Vâng Và v phía giáo viên tro ng này em cũng khi là giáo viên cũng r t là ñ ng viên k huy n k hích và s n sàng giúp ñ . Nhưng ñ n ch mà nói v p hương pháp d y t t thì em ñ ng ý như ng l i k hông ñ ng ý l m. T c là em ch hơ i ñ ng ý c a m t chút thôi v chuy n giáo viên d y t t và có phương p háp t t thì ñ y là t i vì m t s giáo viên k hông t t à ? Hay là như th nào ? Không, t c là nhi u khi giáo viên ch t p trung vào m t s b n, th ñâm ra chưa t o ñ ư c phương pháp chung nên là mình không phù h p v i p hương pháp c a giáo viên. Ví d giáo viên hay t p trung nói chuy n v i m t s b n t t ch ng h n thì mình không phát tri n ñư c kh năng nói c a mình b i vì cô k hông n m b t ñư c ý c a mình cho nên là… T c là m t s hay là nhi u ? M t s thôi . Th còn s khác thì như nào? M t s khác thì cô giáo khá q uan tâm ñ n t t m i ngư i. Ok. Th là không p hàn nàn gì nhi u ñ úng k hông. Th o nào mà h ng thú r t tăng. Trong l p thì em c m th y k hông khí h c t p thi ñua c a l p như th nào ? H i ñ u thì r t là tr m, bây gi thì m i ngư i cũng tham gia t t hơn. T c là s trao ñ i gi a các thành viên cũng như h c sinh v i giáo viên t t hơn nhi u. Trong l p có thi ñua c nh tranh nhi u k hông ? C nh tranh lành m ch, c nh trang t t ý. Không . Em không ñánh giá cho ch cái ph n b n bè có nh hư ng t t, có ñ ng viên tôi tro ng h c t p không. Bây gi em có th ñánh giá cho ch ñ ư c không ? s 5 T c là c m tháy b n b è giúp em r t là nhi u, ñ úng không ?

81

SV: NNC:

SV:

NNC: SV: NNC: SV: NNC:

SV: NNC: SV: NNC: SV:

NNC:

SV: NNC: SV:

NNC: SV:

S ti n b c a b n cũng như s hòa h p v i b n làm mình th y thích h c hơ n. ð c bi t là s ti n b mà mình mu n b n. Trong này thì em có nói là em hơi không bi t ñ t m c tiêu h c t p cho mình l m. T c là như nào nh ? T c là em k hông b i t là em h c có nh ng m c tiêu gì tro ng vi c h c ? ðúng là em hơi không b i t ñ t m c tiêu cho mình. Ví d như là h c ti ng Anh thì cũng m i ch b i t là mình h c ñ nói, h c ñ ñ c sách thôi ch cũng k hông bi t là sau này nó có th c s h u ích gì cho công vi c sau này không, hay là vi c h c trong trư ng thì mình cũng ch ng bi t sau này mình s làm nhi m v gì, làm như th nào. Th thì em có khi nào c m th y là mình c n m t ngư i nào ñ ó mà d mình h i, ñ xin l i k huyên ? Có . Th nh ng lúc c n em có c m th y ai ñ h i han nh ng cái ñ y không ? Chưa . Trong này em không ñ ng ý v i chuy n là ñ i m s c a h u như t t. T c là ñ i m s k hông t t l m ? Em v a nói là ñôi k hi nó làm cho em c m th y n n b t ñ i nhưng ñ ôi khi cũng không sao c . V y thì theo ñánh giá c a em, nhìn chung toàn b thì vi c ñi m không t t có làm cho em c m th y n n nhi u k hông ? Không, ch là thi tho ng hơi bu n. Vì nó k hông x ng v i l i v i s tích c c c a mình nên v y. Không như mong ñ i ñ úng k hông. Em có góp ý gì, hay g i ý gì cho chương trình tiên ti n này ñ nó t t hơn k hông ? Uhm. Qu th c thì em th y mình nên p hân b l i v giáo trình h c. Phân b l i như th nào ? B t ñ i ? Thêm ? Không ph i là b t ñi mà là mình nên thay ñ i l i giáo trình ñ i y. Vì em mu n là mình t p trung các cái, t c là t ng k ĩ năng, t ng kĩ năng m t. Ví d như tro ng quy n New English Files thì b n k ĩ năng h c h n ñ n tro ng m t bài, mình k hông th bao q uát h t ñư c. ð n bây gi thì em th y ñ t chương trình bây gi vào ban ñ u thì t t b i vì bây gi mình b t ñ u h c t k ĩ năng vi t câu thành ño n văn, t c là t nh cho ñ n l n như th thì nó p hát tri n ngay t ñ u ch ngày xưa h c New English File thì chưa chi ñã ph i ñ c c m t bài văn dài ngay t ñ u, chưa chi ñ ã ph i nghe m t bài dài ch nó không t p trung vào t ng k ĩ năng như bây gi . T c là em mu n t p trung vào t ng k ĩ năng hơn ? N hưng ch tư ng là chương trình bây gi k hó hơn ngày trư c ch nh ? Em l i th y d hơn à ? Không, t t nhiên là k hó hơn nhưng mà cái s phân b c a nó h p lí hơn. T c là nó có ñ t p trung vào t ng k ĩ năng ? Vâng, t p trung hơ n. Ngày xưa thì có ñ c thì ñ c, vi t thì vi t. Còn bây gi mình d y vi t t ng câu m t, cô ch a cho t ng câu nh sau ñó m i hình thành m t ñ o n văn. Ch ngày xưa thì b n em c vi t luôn ño n văn. Nhưng hi n nay ch có m i kĩ năng writing là h c riêng ch các k ĩ năng k hác v n h c chung mà ? Nhưng mà nó… 82

NNC: SV: NNC:

SV: NNC: SV: NNC:

SV:

NNC: SV: NNC: SV: NNC: SV:

NNC:

v n tách bi t rõ ràng ? Vâng. Ngày xưa ch th y là chương trình New English File, cái h i ñ u y, b n em h c r t nhi u giáo viên khác nhau y. Thì em có th y là nhi u giáo viên d y như th làm nh hư ng ñ n ch t lư ng d y và h c không ? Không. Th c ra em th y m i giáo viên l i có m t cách d y k hác nhau, có cái hay riêng. Không nh hư ng gì. Em có thêm ý k i n gì n a k hông ? Ngoài vi c phân b l i chương trình ra ? Không . Trong này em cũng nói là em không hay nh n ñ ư c nh ng l i nh n xét t t c a giáo viên l m. T c là ý là l p cô k hông hay khen cá nhân à ? Hay là như nào ? Vâng, l p cô không hay k hen cá nhân ñ âu . Ch khi hoàn thành xo ng m t k ì thi thì cô h i xem b n nào ñư c ñ i m cao thôi, cô bi t th thôi ch cô cũng ch có l i khen c th . Th ví d có b n nào nói trên l p, nói r t hay ch ng h n thì cô có khen k hông ? Không . Em có bao gi c m th y là n u cô khen thì mình s c m th y thích hơn không ? Hay em cũng ch ng th y nó quan tr ng l m ? Em th y nó cũng không quan tr ng l m. V y thì nói tóm l i thì theo em thì t i sao mà h ng thú h c c a em tăng nhi u như th ? Lí do nào là lí do q uan tr ng nh t ? ðó chính là cái n l c c a mình và mình tìm ñư c nh ng k i n th c hay tro ng quy n sách y và th y là mình thích tìm hi u v cu n sách này và n i d ung c a nó. Ch y u là n l c c a mình, mình th y mình h c nhi u cu n sách ñ ó ? Okay. Ch c m ơ n em r t nhi u.

83

SAMPLE TRANSCRIPT OF THE INTERVIEWS (ENGLISH VERSION)
Inte rvie wer:

I just want to ask you for some questio ns related to the questionnaire and you can b e sure that I am the only who can access the information yo u provide. The reason why yo u are chosen is that you reported a co nsiderable change in mo tivation level fro m very lo w to high. First, let’s talk about yo ur reaso ns to learn English. Yo u said in the questionnaire that ed ucation and job opportunities are the most important reaso ns. You were sure o f this from the beginning or came to realize it as you stud y English in the project? Inte rvie wee : I was very clear about that right from the beginning of the schoo l year. I think whatever major you are in, English is very impo rtant. Now I am in this special project, I feel it every stronger. Inte rvie wer: How abo ut yo ur enjo yment when studying English and a desire to learn abo ut English cultures? You think that those are less impo rtant. Any co mments o n that? Inte rvie wee : Actually, I haven’t used to learn abo ut cultures and peop le of another country. I don’t read lots o f books. I learn from the med ia more often and I p refer to learn abo ut our o wn culture rather than another.
Inte rvie wer: Inte rvie wee :

Inte rvie wer: Inte rvie wee :

Inte rvie wer: Inte rvie wee : Inte rvie wer: Inte rvie wee : Inte rvie wer:

Inte rvie wee :

Inte rvie wer:

Ok. Bu.t yo u pretty much want to be able to talk to and make friend s with foreigners, don’t yo u? Absolutely. I particularly enjoy learn to speak English. In the future, I will have co urses in English and o f course I want to make co mments or contrib ute my ideas in class and talk to my teachers in English. If so, how would you explain about your low motivation at the beginning o f the school year? It was because I didn’t like English when I was at high schoo l. The reason is that the teaching methods and my learning strategies were not appropriate. I did n’t enjoy stud ying it at all and that became a habit. Ok. So you didn’t like stud ying very much. That’s right. Ok. But then you started to like it after a while? At least I can say that yo u quite like it now, do n’t you? Yes. So, I want to ask abo ut so me factors that have changed your mind. First, let’s talk about the syllab i. Here you said that the English program met yo ur expectatio ns in general. Can yo u say more about that? Is it difficult for yo u? No, it isn’t. I think the syllab i are not d ifficult at all. We moved from elementary level to the advanced one, so I can deal with it. If there is anything that I am not sure about, I believe it is because I am no t hard-working enough. I’ve heard that there was a big gap between module A2 and B1. So me students say that B1 is much more d ifficult. Did you find it the same way?

84

Inte rvie wee : uhm… Inte rvie wer: Interactio ns was added right? And a little abo ut IELTS as well. Was Inte rvie wee :

Inte rvie wer: Inte rvie wee : Inte rvie wer: Inte rvie wee : Inte rvie wer:

Inte rvie wee :

Inte rvie wer: Inte rvie wee : Inte rvie wer: Inte rvie wee : Inte rvie wer: Inte rvie wee :

Inte rvie wer: Inte rvie wee : Inte rvie wer: Inte rvie wee : Inte rvie wer: Inte rvie wee : Inte rvie wer: Inte rvie wee :

Inte rvie wer:

Inte rvie wee : Inte rvie wer: Inte rvie wee : Inte rvie wer: Inte rvie wee :

it too much and too fast for you? Well, a little b it, I can say. I found it difficult because there were a lo t of new words but the content was still interesting anyway. Too many new words I must say. Did that affect yo ur learning motivation? It urged me to learn more new words so that I could understand the texts. You mean you need ed to try harder to get what you wanted, right? Correct. Here you d idn’t think that the lesso ns were very interesting but still yo u gave positive co mments o n the syllab i. Was it because of the teachers that the lesso ns were not so good? My teachers are very enthusiastic. It was just because there wasn’t a good atmostphere in the class; many people were not active and that made a negative influence on others. So you mean that the lesso ns were not very interesting because of the inactiveness o f your class members? Yes, many o f them are inactive. So, not because o f the activitiese or your teachers? That’s correct. Have you got lots o f d ifficulties in your stud ies? I’ve go t lots o f d ifficultires in my studies. F irst, my English skills are not good enough, especially listening and that in turn de-motivates me. It’s like a vicio us circle. Do you have any difficulty figuring o ut a good ways to learn? Certainly. How would you evaluate your coping po tential to yo ur prob lems? U How well could yo u solve them? I think I have been able to solve most o f my problems pretty well. My skills have been imp ro ved. So you practiced yo urself? That’s right and I also learn fro m my friends. However, so metimes I get confused receiving too much advice. So you ask yo ur friends for ad vice on learning strategies? Are they effective? It depend s. If that is a sk ill I like, I can fo llow my friends’ ad vice and it works. However, if it is not, I don’t see much change no matter what advice. You d isagreed with the statement that your motivation increased because yo ur performance d id n’t mak e yo urself disappo inted with yo ur learning ability. Does that mean you were disappointed? Right. For example, I thought I spoke quite well in class b ut I did n’t get good mark s in oral examinatio ns. The same for listening skill. So you felt a little d isappointed because o f that? Yes. Did that de- motivate you? Sometimes I think.

85

Inte rvie wer: Inte rvie wee : Inte rvie wer: Inte rvie wee : Inte rvie wer:

Inte rvie wee :

Inte rvie wer: Inte rvie wee : Inte rvie wer: Inte rvie wee : Inte rvie wer: Inte rvie wee :

Inte rvie wer: Inte rvie wee : Inte rvie wer: Inte rvie wee : Inte rvie wer: Inte rvie wee : Inte rvie wer: Inte rvie wee :

Inte rvie wer: Inte rvie wee : Inte rvie wer: Inte rvie wee : Inte rvie wer:

Inte rvie wee : Inte rvie wer: Inte rvie wee : Inte rvie wer:

But yo ur friends and family are no t d isspo inted, right? No, they aren’t. So your family also enco urage and support you? No pressure right? Yes. Talk ing abo ut yo ur teachers, yo u also ack nowleged their enthusiasm, enco uragement and helpfulness. However, you are no t so satisfied with their teaching methods. Any further explanation?? Not really. What I meant was that so metimes my teachers o nly focused on some individ uals. They d id no t try to make their teaching approach suitab le to everyo ne. For example, so me teachers o nly speak to good students. I felt like my speaking skill was no t developed because the students did not understand what I meant. Just so me o f them or a lot of them? Just so me. How abo ut others. Some o thers do pay attention to everyo ne. Ok. So not much co mp laint. No wonder why yo ur motivatio n go t high. How do yo u feel abo ut co mpetitiveness in your class? At first my classmates were very shy. Now it’s better. There has much more d iscussio n and interactio ns amo ng students and with teachers. Is there a good sense of co mpetiveness in yo ur class? Not really. You d idn’t given our op inions on the q uestion abo ut yo ur peer influence. Can you do it no w? I go for number 5. It means that you friends have encouraged you a lot? My friends’ pro gress insp ires me to learn, especially when we get along well. Their achievement encouraged me to achieve that much. You mentio ned here that you do not really k now hơ to set your goals? Can yo u explain more about that? It’s true. For example, I just know that I learn English so that I can speak, read book s but I have no clear idea ho w English will be used in the future, in my job or my studies. I do n’t k now exactly the role English will p lay in my courses next year. Have you ever felt like you need someo ne to ask for advice? Yes, I have. Did yo u find anyone? Not at all. Here you disagreed that yo ur mark s had b een good and that helped to increased your motivation. Does that mean yo u grades were not very good? You mentio nen earlier that so metimes unsatisfactory mark s upset you a little. In general, does that d ishearten yo u a lot? Not really. It’s just that I feel bad sometimes ‘cause it does no t reflect my efforts in learning. Not as yo u expect, right? Do you have any co mments or suggestions fo r the program to make it better? Uhm. I dearly think that the syllab i sho uld be re-constructed. How would yo u want that? Eliminate something or add something?

86

Inte rvie wee : Not at all. I think we sho uld change the co urebooks. I wo uld like each

Inte rvie wer:

Inte rvie wee : Inte rvie wer: Inte rvie wee :

Inte rvie wer: Inte rvie wee : Inte rvie wer: Inte rvie wee : Inte rvie wer:

Inte rvie wee : Inte rvie wer: Inte rvie wee : Inte rvie wer:

Inte rvie wee : Inte rvie wer: Inte rvie wee : Inte rvie wer:

Inte rvie wee : Inte rvie wer: Inte rvie wee :

Inte rvie wer:

sk ill to be focused separately. You see, in New English F iles, the four sk ills are integrated in one lesson and I co uld n’t keep track of that. The syllabus now is much better and should be used from the beginning because it b uilds up skills bottom-up. For example, we start with writing sentences first before writing a paragraph and essay. In New English F ile, we had to read a lo ng text out o f a sudden or listened to a lo ng passage witho ut much p reparation. It means that yo u want a focus o n each sk ill? I thought the current mod ule would be more difficult than the previous ones? You think it is easier or what? Of course it is mo re difficult but the way it is organized makes it much more effective. It offers a focus on each sk ill? That’s right. Now teachers help us to construct sentences and later develop them into paragraph. Before, we just started writing a long paragraph right away. But except for writing, the three other sk ills are still integrated in the current mod ule. Am I right? Yes, but still it… focuses much better o n each skill? Right. I remember that in the first two mod ules, there were many teachers in each class. Did you feel that negatively influence teaching and learning q uality? I don’t think so. Each teacher has his/ her own teaching style and I can benefit fro m learning from many teachers. No problem at all. Do you have any additio nal comments? No. You said here that your mo tivation increased not because you freq uently received praises from teachers. Does that mean your teachers d id not usually give praises to individuals o r what? Yup, they do not give p raises to ind ividuals. After each exam, so me just simp ly asked who got the high marks. No praises were given. For example, if a student speaks very good English, will your teacher give him a praise? No. Do you think that if yo u receive praise or good feedback from your teachers, yo u will be motivated or that would make no difference at all. That’s not very important at all. So, generally speaking, why do yo u think yo ur motivation has go t much higher? What factors p lay the mo st important ro le? That is my efforts and what I can learn fro m my classes and coursebooks. When I feel interested in, I’m motivated to read and learn and get k nowled ge. Okay. Thank you very much. I really appreciate it.

87

APPENDIX 4 - Extract of the Attitude/Motivation Test Battery
** Note: A full version of AMTB can be downloaded from http://publish.uwo.ca/~gardner/

Attitude/Motivation Test Battery: International A MT B Research Project
(English version)
**Note: This is the English-language version of the Attitude/Motivation Test Battery (AMTB) for use with secondary school students studying English as a foreign language. The items comprising each scale are presented in the ‘AMTB item-key’ document. The AMTB has been translated and used in our research in Brazil, Croatia, Japan, Poland, Romania, and Spain (Catalonia). Some findings from this research are presented in the document ‘Integrative Motivation and Second Language Acquisition’ (CAAL Talk, 2005). All of the documents mentioned above are available on this website. Copies of the AMTB in the other languages can be obtained from R. C. Gardner.

© 2004 R. C. Gardner, Ph.D. The University of Western Ontario, Canada

88

Following are a number of statements with which some people agree and others disagree. Please circle one alternative below each statement according to the amount of your agreement or disagreement with that item. The following sample item will serve to illustrate the basic procedure. a. Spanish football players are much better than Brazilian football players. Strongly Moderately Slightly Slightly Moderately Disagree Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Strongly Agree

In answering this question, you should have circled one alternative. Some people ould have circled “Strongly Disagree”, others would have circled “Strongly Agree”, while others would have circled any of the alternatives in between. Which one you choose would indicate your own feeling based on everything you know and have heard. Note: there is no right or wrong answer.

1. Strongly Disagree 2. Strongly Disagree 3. Strongly Disagree 4. Strongly Disagree 5. Strongly Disagree 6. Strongly Disagree 7. Strongly Disagree

I wish I could speak many foreign languages perfectly. Moderately Slightly Slightly Moderately Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Agree My parents try to help me to learn English. Moderately Slightly Slightly Disagree Disagree Agree

Moderately Strongly Agree Agree

I don’t pay much attention to the feedback I receive in my English class. Moderately Slightly Slightly Moderately Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Agree I don’t get anxious when I have to answer a question in my English class. Moderately Slightly Slightly Moderately Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Agree I look forward to going to class because my English teacher is so good. Moderately Slightly Slightly Moderately Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Agree Learning English is really great. Moderately Slightly Disagree Disagree

Slightly Agree

Moderately Strongly Agree Agree

If Japan had no contact with English-speaking countries, it would be a great loss. Moderately Slightly Slightly Moderately Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Agree

89

Studying English is important because it will allow me to be more at ease with people who speak English. Strongly Moderately Slightly Slightly Moderately Strongly Disagree Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Agree 9. Strongly Disagree 10. Strongly Disagree 11. Strongly Disagree 12. Strongly Disagree 13. Strongly Disagree 14. Strongly Disagree 15. Strongly Disagree 16. Strongly Disagree 17. Strongly Disagree I have a strong desire to know all aspects of English. Moderately Slightly Slightly Moderately Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Agree My English class is really a waste of time. Moderately Slightly Slightly Disagree Disagree Agree

8.

Moderately Strongly Agree Agree

I would get nervous if I had to speak English to a tourist. Moderately Slightly Slightly Moderately Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Agree Studying foreign languages is not enjoyable. Moderately Slightly Slightly Disagree Disagree Agree

Moderately Strongly Agree Agree

I make a point of trying to understand all the English I see and hear. Moderately Slightly Slightly Moderately Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Agree I don’t think my English teacher is very good. Moderately Slightly Slightly Disagree Disagree Agree

Moderately Strongly Agree Agree

Studying English is important because I will need it for my career. Moderately Slightly Slightly Moderately Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Agree I never feel quite sure of myself when I am speaking in our English class. Moderately Slightly Slightly Moderately Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Agree Knowing English isn’t really an important goal in my life. Moderately Slightly Slightly Moderately Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Agree

90

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful