Investigacin Cuantitativa en Ciencias del Lenguaje.

OPTION 1: Motivations and Demotivations of College Students

OPTION 2: College teachers motivation
OPTION 3: Motivated college teachers impact on their students learning

ARTICLES:
A Comparative Analysis of Teacher and Student Perceptions of Sources of
Motivation and Demotivation in College Classes
Theyre about both. But no tiene modelo grfico

Keywords: Motivation, demotivation, teacher behavior, course design, student attitudes.

The purpose of this study //was to examine the degree to which teachers
perceptions of what affects student motivation. // was to analyze teacher perceptions of
what motivates and demotivates students and to examine the congruency between
teachers perceptions and students reports of those factors.

The behavior of the teacher influences the behavior of the student, affecting the learning
outcomes.

MOTIVATION has been described as the energy or stimulation that initiates a process in
which individuals make choices that include a certain purpose or direction followed by
involvement. Meaning that people who are motivated to achieve a specific goal will be
motivated to choose to do things that will achieve that goal.

This study doesnt have a cause-effect ending, and the last two questions were designed to
probe the influence of teacher assumptions about sources of student motivation and
demotivation. There are variety of factors, some are directly influences by what a teacher
does and others are far beyond the teachers control. Csikszentmihalyi (1988) had this
theory in which Perseverance and motivation are related. When people visualize
themselves as capable of achieving a task, they are more likely to see the rewarding so
theyd remain motivated so they could accomplish it. On the other hand, if they think of the
task as something beyond their capabilities causing dissatisfaction to grow and since
expectations were not what they were hoping for motivation decreases.

RESEARCH QUESTIONS:

1.- What factors do teachers perceive as primary sources of student motivation and
demotivation in college classes?

2.- Are there differences between teacher and student perceptions of sources of
student motivation and demotivation?

3.- Is there a relationship between teacher motivation and the degree to which
students are perceived as being motivated?

PAGE 4

4.- Is there a relationship between teacher motivation and perceived cources of

motivation and demotivation among students?

5.- Is there a relationship between teacher perceptions of the degree to which

students are perceived as being motivated and perceived sources of motivation and
demotivation?

Questions for the teachers (faculty)

1.- WHAT DO YOU PERCEIVE MOTIVATES STUDENTS TO TRY TO DO THEIR BEST IN

THIS CLASS AND TOACHIEVE YOUR INSTRUCTIONAL GOALS?

2.- WHAT DO YOU PERCEIVE DECREASES STUDENTS MOTIVATION TO TRY TO DO

THEIR BEST IN CLASS AND TO ACHIEVE YOUR INSTRUCTIONAL GOALS?

That study took place in a lot of academic units like architecture (3%), business (12%),
communication (7%), education (5%), engineering (8%), music (6%), nursing (6%). More
than half were male faculty

In the previous study (from Gorham and Christophel, 1992) students were asked two
questions.

1.- What things motivate you to try hard to do your best in that class?

2.- What things decrease your motivation to try hard to do your best in that class?

The answers from the questions to the faculty and the two questions above which were
answered by the students were compared.

CHECK PAGE 6 FOLLOWING THEIR RESPONSE hg

So, the results: Motivators (Teachers: 2.48, Students: 2.30) and demotivators (Teachers:
1.84, Students: 1.89) *I kndda dont fully get what the rest of it means. They added
categories PAGE 11 ITS VERY IMPORTANT

Towards understanding interpreter trainees (de)motivation: An

exploratory study (MEANING TRANSLATORS)

Es de traductores, hace referencia de los autores del artculo pasado, de los seores que los
pasados citaron. Definitivamente no sirve, porque es misto (5.1) page 6

Keywords: Motivation, demotivation, interpreter training, pedagogy.

This research was based and inspired on 90 students in a MA-level and it was found that
only 40% had managed to keep up with their deliberate practice

MOTIVATION is an important factor on interpreting training (translator to be/ students),

because it requires regular and sustained practice.

Its a study of Chinese translators. It was collected from 120 translators and 40 of them had
already their degree. This study had two factors internal and external. The most frequent
demotivating factor was an external and it was the teacher factor.

Motivation of teachers in higher education

Its about teachers. Empirical, but has RQ, and it has Modelo grfico

Motivated students need motivated teachers. (Pretty cool quote)

Keywords: motivation, higher education, Competitive advantage, Andragogy, Teaching

methods, Theory X and Theory Y.

*Douglas McGregor (1960) in his book The Human Side of Enterprise proposed two
theories to view employee motivation and labeled them Theory X and Theory Y.
McGregors perspective was that managements job is more than simply giving orders
and coercing obedience; it was a careful balancing of the needs of the organization with
the needs of individuals (McGregor, 1960; Bennis et al., 2000 cited Bobic and Davis,
2003). Teachers job too is more than simply teaching and demanding student
discipline; it is indeed a careful balancing of the institutional needs with the learning
needs of students.*

MOTIVATION is the process that accounts for an individuals intensity, direction and
persistence of effort toward attaining a goal (Robbins)
So, teacher motivation is important to the growing and evolving field of higher education
but still its not that investigated. In this article McGregors Theory X and Y is going to
study Teacher motivation in higher education. They were classified under Theory X and
Theory Y styles. Management techniques and teaching methods, teaching style and specific
motivators in the class and on the job were investigated.
Educators considered motivation more desirable and to result in better learning outcomes
than extrinsic motivation.

A motivated teacher must be guided by the most important goal which is that his/her
students will develop that motivation to learn.
Only motivated teachers can deliver education and play other roles effectively.
Motivation involves a constellation of beliefs, perceptions, values, interests and actions that
are all closely related.
Therere two different types of approaches to understand motivation, cognitive behaviors
and non-cognitive aspects. Gottfried(1990) says that motivation is an enjoyment of school
learning, curiosity, persistence, learning of challenging. On the other hand,
Bandura(1994a/1998) says that cognitive, behavioral, personal and environmental factors
determine motivation and behavior. And finally, Turner, thinks of motivation as a
synonymous to cognitive engagement.

In Douglas McGregors book The Human Side of Enterprise he suggested two theories to
talk about employee motivation and categorized them as Theory X and Theory Y. (The first
theory is considered as hard and the second one as soft) He thought that managements
job was more than just giving instructions, his perspective was more like a delicate balance
of the organization and the needs of their workers. (McGregor, 1960; Bennis et al., 2000
cited Bobic and Davis,2003). Saying that, teachers job as well is more than just teaching
and demanding student to behave; it is indeed a careful balancing of the institutional needs
with the learning needs of students.

Theory X: it was based in mainly three propositions. The first one is the responsibility of
management to organize the elements of productive enterprise, like, money, materials,
equipment and people, all in the interest of economic ends. The second one it is dealing
with people involved the process of directing their efforts, motivating them for
performance, controlling their actions and achieving fitness with the needs of the
organization by modifying their behavior. And the third one is when people would be
passive or may even resist organizational needs, without active intervention by
management.

Theory Y: is identified with permissiveness and need satisfaction and people from this
category often take advantage of an overly permissive manager by demanding more but
performing less. He believed these assumptions could lead to effective management of
people in organizations under the rubric of Theory Y.
The major assumptions of Theory Y are more than four kinds of options: the first one is the
responsibility of management to organize the elements of productive enterprise, like
money, materials, equipment and people, all in the interest of economic ends. The second
one its that by nature people are not passive or resistant to organizational needs. They
become so due to their experiences in organizations. The third one is that the management
is responsible to make it possible for people to recognize and develop human characteristics
such as motivation, potential for development, capacity for assuming responsibility and
readiness to direct behavior toward organizational goals; The fourth is that the
management is essentially responsible to arrange organizational conditions and methods
of operation so that people can perform and achieve their own goals by directing their
efforts toward organizational objectives; and finally that the ability to be innovative and
creative exists among a large, rather than a small segment of the population.

Page 5 (a little bit of background and history)

Questions
1.- Can the teachers be classified under Theory X and Theory Y styles?
2.- Would there be teachers who display a combination of Theory X-Y and Theory Y-
X behaviors?
3.- What are the factors that motivate teachers under Theory X and Theory Y styles?
What are the commonalities and differences?
4.- Would the teaching methods and classroom management techniques vary
according to teacher styles?
5.- Whether teacher style has a bearing on some roles played by the teachers?
6.- What are the implications of these behaviors for the student learning?

There were 4 Hypothesis

 H1. There is no relationship between teacher style and being invited as a guest
lecturer.
H2. There is no relationship between teacher style and participation in professional
societies.
H3. There is no relationship between teacher style and being invited by a company
to solve practical problems.
H4. There is no relationship between teacher style and average time spent on
research work per week.
H5. There is no relationship between teacher style and research publications.
H6. There is a no relationship between style and identifying any real-time problems
and finding solutions.

PAGE 8 on talks about the study case

Students Response to Academic Setback: Growth Mindset as a

Buffer Against Demotivation

Its about students setback and its a case of Indonesia. its a study that took place all
semester. And this showed that the motivational pattern became more pronounced among
students that experienced setback in their mid-term exam.

Key words: academic setback, impact theory of ability, motivation, academic performance,
goal orientation.

Failures such as getting thrown out of school, getting a low grade in an exam or failing a
course can affect students in two different ways some may feel de-motivated and avoid
similar challenges, while others could feel challenged, evaluate the causes of their setback,
and plan strategies to address those problems.

Research Questions
1.- Do (growth) mindsets about intelligence and academic ability positively predict
the adoption a learning goal, effort attribution, and subsequent course performance, while
negatively predict demotivation, after controlling for prior academic ability?
2.- Do learning goal, effort attribution, and de-motivation mediate the relationships
between mindsets about intelligence/ability with subsequent course performance?
 3.- Do the relationships between mindsets, motivational factors, and subsequent
course performance become more pronounced for students who experienced setback?

Tema: Do English Language Teacher Qualities Affect Student

Performance?: An Explanatory Study From Bangladesh

Keywords: English language teacher quality, student performance, cognitive

theories, affective filter hypothesis

This a study conducted to investigate the correlation between

English language teacher quality and student performance at a private university in
Bangladesh. The purpose of this is identify the
relationship between teacher quality and student performance.
this article seeks to ensure that teachers can modify their behavior in accordance with
students preference instead of relying on myth pertaining to desired teacher quality. In
addition, academic institutions can take initiatives to nurture teacher quality which may
impact on student performance. Is a qualitative-quantitative investigation, a
questionnaire was applied to the students in order to evaluate the quality of the teachers
in the school and to understand a little the behavior that had the students. it was possible
to conclude that teachers play an important role in the student's life and in their mood.
Questionnaire:
Personal qualities
1. Please tell us how caring your teacher was.
2. Please share your personal experiences about how supportive your teacher was.
3. Did your teacher try to build rapport with you?
4. How friendly was your teacher?
5. Was your teacher aware of your mood? Can you recall any incident?
Pedagogic qualities
1. Can you tell us how your teacher used to give feedback?
2. Did your teacher reward positive behavior?
3. Did your teacher monitor and assess your progress?
4. Was your teacher fluent?
5. Could your teacher create anxiety-free environment in the classroom?
6. Did your teacher listen to your questions, comments, and concerns?
7. Did your teacher pay attention to weak students?
8. Did your teacher use examples while teaching reading, writing, speaking, listening, and
grammar? Did you like the way your teacher taught these skills?
9. Did your teacher focus on understanding rather than memorization?
Tema: A test-retest analysis of student motivation, teacher immedeacy, and
perceived sources of motivation and demotivation in collage clases.

This study investigated the impact of teachers use of immediacy behaviors on students
reported motivation to study over the course of a semester. Students state and trait
motivation to study for a class was measured at three points during a semester. Reports of
teachers use of verbal and nonverbal immediacy were collected at two points in a
semester. It was hypothesized that not all students would respond similarly to a teacher
low in immediacy. Support was found for this hypothesis. Students beginning the
semester with either low or moderate state motivation to study were found to have
increased levels of motivation later in the semester when exposed to a highly immediate
teacher. Students beginning the semester with high motivation maintained high
motivation regardless of the level of immediacy they reported their teacher of having.
Keywords: Nonverbal Immediacy, Verbal Immediacy, State Motivation

Research questions:

Rq1: What factors does students perceive as primary sources of motivation and
demotivation in college clases?

RQ2: Do students perception of sources of motivation and demotivation change over the
course of the semester?

RQ3: Does teachers immedeacy change over the course of the semester?

RQ4: Does student state motivation change over the course of the semester?

RQ5: Is there a consistent relationship between teacher immedeacy and student state
motivation across the course of the semester?

RQ6: Is there a (consistent) relationship between student state motivation and

perceptions of sources of motivation and demotivation across the course of the
semester?

RQ7: Is there a (consistent) relationship between teacher immedeacy and perceptions of

sources of motivation and demotivation across the course of the semester?
Tema: Vocabulary learning from reading Examining the interactions between
task and learner related variables.
In the field of second and foreign language learning, how various task characteristics
affect language learning has been the focus of many recent studies. Much of this research
examined the relationship between task characteristics and task performance without
fully taking into account learner related variables. The present study aimed to assess task
complexity and sequence in relation to the learner related variables drawn from the social
cognitive perspective of self-regulated learning, i.e. self-efficacy beliefs and frequency of
learning strategy use, as they were applied to two versions of vocabulary learning from
reading tasks. The tasks designed for the present study were based on the componential
framework for second language task design. With tasks and task sequence
counterbalanced, 146 first-year university students (mean age=18.59 years) were
randomly assigned to one of four groups. Results reveal a significant effect of task
sequence on vocabulary learning self-efficacy beliefs, frequency of learning strategy use
and task performance, and a significant interaction effect of sequence with task
complexity. Findings are discussed in terms of complex interactions between task and
learner factors.

Keywords: Task complexity Task sequence Self-efficacy belief Learning strategy use
Vocabulary learning
RQ1: What effect do tasks at different levels of complexity have on learners' self-
efficacy beliefs?
RQ2: What is the relationship between learners' self-efficacy beliefs for different task
versions and the actual learning activities they deploy in the learning process?
RQ3: How do learners' self-efficacy beliefs about simple and complex versions of a reading
and EFL vocabulary learning task affect learning outcomes?
TEMA: MEASUREMENTS OF EFFECTIVE TEACHING IN THE TRADITIONAL AND ONLINE
CONTEXTS: TEACHER IMMEDIACY, STUDENT MOTIVATION, & STUDENT LEARNING.

This study developed out of a growing acknowledgement that online instructors

communication behaviors, while not conforming to traditional conceptions of immediacy,
may nevertheless function similarly in the online classroom (utilizing an online version of
immediacy behaviors). The study examines the relationship between teachers verbal and
nonverbal behaviors and students perceptions of their own motivation and learning.
These relationships were compared to those resulting from a similar evaluation of the
variables in the traditional classroom.
Results demonstrated a positive relationship between the conceptualized online
immediacy, student motivation, and student learning variables in the online classroom.
Findings also confirmed past research with results showing a positive relationship
between all variables in the traditional classroom. Comparison tests revealed no
significant difference between these relationships in the traditional versus online context.
Research questions:
RQ1: Will students reports of an instructors measured nonverbal immediacy
behaviors in the online classroom be positively associated with students
reports of state motivation?
RQ2: Will the association between immediacy behaviors in the traditional
classroom and student motivation be stronger than the association between
immediacy behaviors in the online classroom and student motivation?
RQ3: Will students reports of an instructors measured nonverbal immediacy
behaviors in the online classroom be positively associated with students
reports of affective learning?
RQ5: Will the association between immediacy behaviors in the traditional
classroom and student learning outcomes be stronger than the association
between immediacy behaviors in the online classroom and student learning
outcomes?
YES

NO