Motivation and Language Proficiency: Instrumental

Available online at www.sciencedirect.com

Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 66 (2012) 432 – 440

The 8th International Language for Specific Purposes (LSP) Seminar - Aligning Theoretical Knowledge with Professional Practice

Motivation and Language Proficiency: Instrumental and Integrative Aspects Adlina Abdul Samada*, Atika Etemadzadehb, Hamid Roohbakhsh Farc a,b,c

Language Academy, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia

Abstract This study investigated the relationship between motivation and language proficiency of Iranian EFL learners studying in Universiti Teknologi Malaysia [UTM]. Two aspects of motivation were considered in this paper i.e. instrumental and integrative. 100 Iranian students studying in UTM and from different faculties served as respondents to reflect a variety of ideas about learning a second language. Participants were those with IELTS band score 6 and above [high achievers] and below 6 [low achievers]. An integrative and instrumental motivation nineteen-item questionnaire adopted from standardized questionnaires such as Attitude Motivation Test Battery (AMTB) [1 & 2] was used as the instrument of the study. The results motivation [r=.72]. This indicated that high achievers L2 learners were highly integrative motivated © 2012 2012 The The Authors. Authors. Published Published by by Elsevier Ltd. © Elsevier Ltd. Selection and and/or peer-review under responsibility of the 2012 Committee, Language Academy, Universiti Teknologi Selection peer-review under responsibility of the LSPLSP 2012 Committee, Language Academy, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia. Keywords: motivation; instrumental/ integrative motivation; language proficiency

1. Introduction

Motivation plays a vital role in language learning without which even gifted individuals cannot accomplish long-term goals, whatever the curricula and whoever the teacher [3; 1; 4; 5]. Moreover, it has been widely accepted by teachers and researchers that motivation is one of the key factors influencing the rate and success of second/foreign language [L2] learning because it often compensates for deficiencies in language aptitude and learning [6; 7 ; 8; 9]. Thus, it might be said that all other factors involved in second language [L2] acquisition presuppose the effects of motivation to * Corresponding author. Tel.:+6-012-710-4628 E-mail address: [email protected]

1877-0428 © 2012 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. Selection and peer-review under responsibility of the LSP 2012 Committee, Language Academy, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia.. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.11.287

Adlina Abdul Samad et al. / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 66 (2012) 432 – 440

433

some extent. There have been many motivational definitions and each one refers to only partial aspects of it and not embracing all its components. Pintrich and Schunk [10], for instance, referred to motivation as a force that energizes sustain and directs behaviour toward a goal. Dornyei ([11]:66) also The essence is that motivation concerns the fundamental question of why people think and behave as they do, and we should never assume that we know the answer. 1.1. The Importance of Motivation Motivation is a complex variable and will become even more complex when the target of learning is the mastery of a second/foreign language. Generally, learning a second language is different from other subjects; since other variables such as learning cultural parameters that shape the framework of learning a language are also included. Therefore, the role of affective variables especially motivation becomes more crucial. The importance of motivation has also been addressed in both general psychology and education, specifically in relation to language acquisition. Weinstein ([12]: 81) asserts . In relation to education and especially second language learning, Corder ([13]: 164) highlights the importance of s inevitable that a human being will learn a second language if he motivation as these definitions, it is not surprising that each psychological school views differently the complexity and importance of motivation. Each school has their own specific view toward human behaviour and each is associated with a different theory of motivation whilst suggesting different definitions. 1.2. Integrative and Instrumental Motivation Some scholars introduced two kinds of motivation among second language learners. Gardner [14], a prominent scholar in the field of motivation by studying the principal motives that prompted learners, integrative instrumental laid particular stress on the motivation. According to Gardner [14], integrative motivation

uage, to get a better job or a ([15]: 472). Gardner, Clement & Gliksman [16] in their ten-year-long research program proved that success in language attainment was dependent on the learner's affective reactions toward the target linguistic-cultural group (in addition to aptitude for learning a second language). This study highlighted the importance of integrative motivation in language learning. However, some other studies [17]. They indicated that instrumental motivation could be just as powerfully correlated with L2 achievement as integrative motivation. Therefore, based on the aim of learning a second language, learners can be divided into two separate groups; learners who learn English for instrumental purposes i.e. finding jobs or improving the career and those who learn English for integrative purposes i.e. being a member of that society. Eventually, Gardner [18: 144] gave clear definition for these two concepts: Integrative reasons are defined as those, which indicate an interest in learning the language in order to meet and communicate with members of the second language community. Instrumental reasons refer to those reasons, which

434


stress the pragmatic aspects of learning the second language, without any particular interest in communicating with the second language community. In a number of other studies, Gardner [18] found that success or failure in learning French in Canada was associated with integrative motivation. The results of such findings led to the development of a battery of testing instruments, the Attitude/Motivation Test Battery (AMTB) ([14]; [1]), which has e stimulated many other empirical studies and helped Gardner [18] socio1.3. Motivation and Second language Learning Motivation to learn is an intricate, multifaceted construct and becomes even more complex when the target of the learning process is the mastery of a second language. Learning an L2 can be viewed from two sides: language is a learnable school subject like other school subjects or a central social psychological phenomenon ([14]: 139). McNamara [19] highlighted the social aspect of L2 acquisition. This means that the mastery of an L2 is not merely an educational issue but it is also a deeply social event with a wide range of elements of the L2 culture. 1.4. Purpose of the Study and Research Question Very few studies in the context of Iran have investigated the relationship between motivation and language achievement. Furthermore, the relationship has been not been taken into account for developing instrumental motivations and learning a foreign language is worth investigating. Thus, having the importance of motivation in mind, the present paper aimed at investigating the relationship between integrative-instrumental motivation and language proficiency of second language learners. Based on the objectives of the study, the following questions are proposed:

1. proficiency in learning a foreign language? 2.

Is there a significant relationship be proficiency in learning a foreign language?

2. Method 2.1. Participants 100 Iranian postgraduate students studying in Universiti Teknologi Malaysia [UTM] who had IELTS scores participated in this study. These participants were studying different majors in UTM, male or female who were doing their Masters or PhDs. Selection of this group of participants was based on the fact that they were EFL students studying in an international university and they seemed to have a broader view about the reasons for learning another language. They were informed that their answers to the items in the questionnaire and their IELTS scores would be kept confidential and used


435

only for statistical analysis. Participants were divided into two groups: High achievers & Low achievers. High achievers were those who obtained at least 6 in IELTS and Low achievers were those who obtained below 6. Band 6 is the criteria for accepting or rejecting the application for direct entry to study in UTM and the grouping criteria was applied as the boundary between high achievers and low achievers in this study. 2.2. Instruments Questionnaire: A nineteen-item questionnaire comprising integrative and instrumental motivation questions was the main instrument of this study. It was adopted from standardized questionnaires such as AMTB [1 & 2]. Revisions were made to make it concise and clear enough to suit the purpose of this study. The primary form of the questionnaire consisted of twenty items, ten items for integrative orientation and ten items for instrumental. Item number 20, which was similar to item number 6, was omitted to become nineteen questions. The items were classified into two groups: integrative and instrumental. Ten of these items reflected an instrumental motivation [odd number items] and nine were indicative of integrative motivation [even numbered items]. The questionnaire was designed on a five-point Likert scale, indicating strongly agree, agree, no idea, disagree, and strongly disagree. The instruction was short and clear. The whole questionnaire was designed in a way that students could to answer it quickly and easily. At the bottom of the questionnaire, space was provided were not asked as it might affect negatively the fill in their IELTS band score but honesty in answering the IELTS band. 2.3. Procedure Once data has been collected, they were analyzed using the SPSS software program. Answer sheets were divided into two main categories representing integrative and instrumental items and each were given a code to make the computation easier. For the Likert scales, they were assigned some codes as well. The mean for integrative and instrumental items for each participant was calculated and correlated with their IELTS score. The main statistical procedure of the study was to estimate the correlation coefficients between integrative3. Results Descriptive analysis was done to investigate the frequency of participants in integrative and instrumental categories. Inferential statistics were also used to analyze the obtained data. Data analysis using SPSS computer program was conducted on 100 questionnaires that were gathered and analyzed. Since the main purpose of the study was to find the relationship between integrative/instrumental ion of correlation. Table 3.1 plots the frequency of participants with integrative or instrumental motivation.

436


Table 3.1.The frequency of distribution of integrative/instrumental motivation

Frequency

Percent

Valid Integrative

42

42.0

Instrumental Total

58 100

58.0 100.0

The table shows that 42 [42%] out of 100 students had integrative motivation while the majority i.e. 58 [58%] were instrumentally motivated to learn a second language. 3.1. Results for the Relationship between Integrative/Instrumental Motivation and IELTS Score A two-tailed Pearson Product Moment correlation coefficient analysis was computed to assess the relationship between participants' mean score in the questionnaire with their scores in IELTS. The participants' mean score in the questionnaire was considered as the independent variable while correlations coefficients among the variables. Table 3.2 Correlation Coefficients between Integrative/Instrumental Motivation and IELTS Score

Motivation N IELTS Score Integrative 42 .72* Instrumental 58 .35 **. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level [2-tailed].

Table 3.2 shows was statistically significant [r=.72]. However, no significant correlation was established between instrumental motivation and IELTS core [r=.35]. 3.2. Results of Multiple Regressions edict their score in IELTS, the two variables i.e. motivation [instrumental & integrative] and IELTS score were analyzed using Multiple Regression. Table 3.3 lists the results of SPSS analysis for Linear Regression. Table 3.3 Multiple Regression Model

1

Model R R square Constant .83 .80 Integrative Instrumental a. Predictors: [Constant], Integrative, Instrumental b. Dependent Variable: IELTS

Beta .69 .28

Table 3.3 demonstrates the variance of IELTS scores from the square of correlation coefficients, i.e. Beta scores. Integrative motivation holds the largest variance in IELTS score [.69]. It means that


437

instrumental motivation could predict a smaller portion of IELTS score variation [.28] than the integrative motivation. Evidently, the results of Multiple Regressions revealed that the variance depicted by integrative motivation was statistically significant. In other words, a high portion [.80%] of . Moreover, the results proved that integrative motivation specified the most variation [.69] 3.3. Results for High Achiever and Low Achiever Groups of Participants A descriptive analysis was computed to examine the frequency of participants in two groups of high achievers and low achievers. Table 3.4 shows the result of SPSS analysis for two groups of participants. Table 3.4 frequency of integrative/instrumental motivation in two groups of participants

Valid

High Achievers Low Achievers Total

n 54 46 100

Frequency Integrative Percent 31 57% 11 23% 42 -

Instrumental 23 35 58

Percent 42% 76% -

As seen in the table, a total of 54 out of 100 participants were regarded as high achievers based on their IELTS score, among which, 31 [57%] of high achievers were integratively motivated and only 23 [42%] of them were instrumentally motivated. Moreover, 35 [76%] of the 46 participants who were considered as low achievers were instrumentally motivated. Only 11 [23%] of them were integratively motivated. In other words, the majority of high achiever learners [57%] had integrative motivation toward learning a second language. On the other hand, the majority of low achiever learners [76%] had instrumental motivation in learning a second language. 4. Discussion In this section, the research questions presented in this paper are dealt with one by one. Each question is answered based on the findings of the study. The first research question asked whether there is any significant relationship be learning a foreign language. The findings of this study revealed that there was a significant positive nguage [r = 0.72]. In fact, if the students have high integrative motivation, the IELTS scores will be higher. The second research question asked whether there is a significant relationship between ning a foreign language. The results revealed that there was no significant positive correlation coefficient between instrumental motivation and relationship betw The result indicates that other factors may have affected their motivation to learn a second language. The result of Multiple Regression revealed that not only integrative motivation has a positive proficiency in IELTS exam. The result of this study is consistent with Hernandez [20] whose findings showed that integrative mot

438


learning a second language. However, the results of co-relational study are in contrast with some previous research in which no significant relationship was established between integrative motivation and second language learning [21; 22]. An important reason for the discrepancy of the results of studies in the field of motivation which should be taken into consideration is the context in which learning takes place. This factor has recently received due attention because of its impact on various aspects of the teaching/learning process. The context for learning a second language is said to control much of the effort one invests in learning a ([23]: 269) view, second language. In . These factors can be classified as linguistic, social, cultural, political, economical, and educational. All of them have great impact not only on the processes of language learning but also on the procedures and findings of many researches in the field of ESL/ EFL. . It is believed that despite the attempts of many scholars and experts in the field to find an ultimate or a best method for learning a language, no alternative has been suggested due to the notion that it is context which determines the best method. Thus, one method of teaching cannot be applied to any context. Nunan ([25]: 4) From the above-mentioned discussions, it could be concluded that motivation is highly controlled by many factors. Thus, interpretations and applications of similar results should be done with care. Educational settings in which students attempt to acquire different skills and knowledge should also be considered in interpreting the results of every research in the field of EFL. Whether the educational system provides opportunities for students to have a clear view of the target language concerning material development or teacher education is also a matter of concern. Recently, the role of educational among specialists in the field [26; 25]. As a system result, there seems to be a shift in motivational researches from social aspects to educational settings [11]. In other words, researchers are looking for motivational sources from inside classroom. 5. Conclusion The findings of the study have shown that English language teachers need to become more aware of affective factors such as integrative motivation. Teachers who are aware of motivation may help students by promoting their integrative motivation. They need to design assignments or class activities inclusive of motivation that would provide opportunities for students to communicate and interact within a language community. Opportunities such as having direct contact with native speakers or near-native speakers of L2 through interviews may increase their integrative motivation in learning a second language. These activities provide second language learners with consistent exposure to a authentic and meaningful context in which they may use their language to explore the linguistic and cultural differences of the L2 culture, in addition to allowing them to reflect on the similarities and differences between their own culture and the L2 culture. On the whole, considering the important role of motivation in second language learning, further research may be carried out interest and reinforce their attitudes towards learning a second language. It would be idealistic that the researchers take on the role of teachers to highlight and incorporate motivation into the teaching and learning of L2.


References [1] Gardner RC. Social Psychology and Second Language Learning: The role of attitudes and motivation. London: Edward Arnold; 1985. [2] Clément R & Gardner RC. Social psychological perspectives on second language acquisition. Chapter 24 in H. Giles & W. P. Robinson [Eds.], Handbook of language and social psychology. Chichester, England: John Wiley and Sons; 1990. [3] Clément R, Gardner RC & Smythe PC. Social and individual factors in second Language acquisition. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science 1980, 12, 293-302. [4] Krashen S. The theoretical and practical relevance of simple codes in second language acquisition. In Scarcella and Krashen; 1981. [5] Spolsky B. Anniversary article: Language motivation revisited. Applied Linguistics 2000, 21,157- 159. [6] Ely C. An analysis of discomfort, risk-taking, sociability and motivation in the second language classroom. Language Learning 1986, 36, 1-25. [7] Gardner RC. Correlation, causation, motivation, and second language acquisition. Canadian Psychology Journal 2000, 41, 1-24. [8] Scarcella RC & Oxford RL. The Tapestry of Language Learning: The individual in communicative classroom. Boston: Heinle & Heinle; 1992. [9] Tremblay PF & Gardner RC. Expanding the motivation construct in language learning. Modern Language Journal 1995, 7: 505-518. [10] Pintrich PR & Schunk DH. Motivation in Education: Theory, research and applications. Englewood Cliffs, NJ.: Prentice Hall; 1996. [11] Dornyei Z. Psychology of the Language Learner: Individual Differences in Second Language Acquisition. Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum; 2005. [12] Weinstein B. A theory of motivation for some classroom experiment. Journal of Educational Psychology 1998. 71, 3-25. International Review of applied Linguistics [13] Corder SP. 1967. 5[4], 162-170. [14] Gardner RC. Social psychological aspect of second language acquisition. In H.Giles & J.Clair [Eds.], Language and Social Psychology [pp. 193-220]. Oxford: Blackwell Gardner and Lambert; 1979. [15] Crookes G& Schmidt R. Motivation: Reopening the research agenda. Language Learning 1991, 41[4], 469-512. [16] Gardner RC, Smyth PC, Clement R & Gliksman L. Second language acquisition: A social psychological perspective. Canadian Modern Language Review 1977, 32, 198-213. [17] Cooper RL& Fishman JA. A study of language attitudes. In J. A. Fishman, R. L. Cooper, & A. W. Conrad [Eds.], The Spread of English [pp. 235-254]. Rowley, Mass.: Newbury House Publishers; 1977. [18] Gardner RC. Social factors in second language acquisition and bilinguality. Invited chapter in Individual, Language and Society 1977, 103-148, published by The Canada Council. [19] Macnamara J. Bilingualism in the modern world. Journal of Social Issue 1967, 2,1-7. [20] Hernandez T. Integrative Motivation as a Predictor of Success in the Intermediate Foreign Language Classroom. FOREIGN LANGUAGE ANNALS 2006. Vol. 39, No. 4. [21] Vaezi Z. Language Learning Motivation among Iranian Undergraduate Students. World Applied Sciences Journal 2008, 5 [1], 54-61.

439

440


[22] Al-Tamimi A & Shuib M. Motivation And Attitudes Towards Learning English: A Study Of Petroleum Engineering Undergraduates At Hadhramout University Of Sciences And Technology. GEMA Online Journal of Language Studies 2009, 9[2], 29-55. [23] Stern HH. Fundamental Concepts of Language Teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1991. [24] PrabhuNS. There Is No Best Method Why? TESOL Quarterly 1990. Volume 24, Issue 2, p: 161 176. [25] Nunan D. Second language teaching & learning. Heinle & Heinle Publishers; 1999. [3rd edition]. [26] Field A. London: Sage; 2009.