DATA ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION

Part III: Conclusion, gives concluding remarks, pedagogical implications, its limitations and suggestions for further studies.

(LUAN.van.THAC.si).an.investigation.into.the.relationship.between.motivations.and.language.learning.strategies.of.first.year.students.at.faculty.of.electrical.engineering.technology..hanoi.university.of.industry(LUAN.van.THAC.si).an.investigation.into.the.relationship.between.motivations.and.language.learning.strategies.of.first.year.students.at.faculty.of.electrical.engineering.technology..hanoi.university.of.industry(LUAN.van.THAC.si).an.investigation.into.the.relationship.between.motivations.and.language.learning.strategies.of.first.year.students.at.faculty.of.electrical.engineering.technology..hanoi.university.of.industry(LUAN.van.THAC.si).an.investigation.into.the.relationship.between.motivations.and.language.learning.strategies.of.first.year.students.at.faculty.of.electrical.engineering.technology..hanoi.university.of.industry

PART B: DEVELOPMENT CHAPTER 1: LITERATURE REVIEW

This chapter is divided into three major sections. The first section sheds some light on theoretical background to motivation in second language learning. The second section shows an overview of language learning strategies. The third section focuses on related previous studies on relationships between motivation and language learning strategies.

1.1. The overview of motivation in second language learning 1.1.1. Definition of motivation in second language learning

There are many different ways to define motivation. Bandura (1986) defines motivation as a goal-directed behaviour begun and reinforced by expectations concerning the anticipated results or effects of actions and effectiveness for performing those actions. Myron (2004: 10) shared the same opinion that “motivation is the internal processes that give behaviour its energy and direction including goals, beliefs, perceptions and expectations”

According to Pintrich (2003), the key construct “motivation” comes from the Latin verb “movere”, which means to “move”. In terms of second language learning, Dửrnyei (2005, p.65) explains that motivation is a “dynamic, ever-changing process”

which provides “the primary impetus to initiate L2 learning and later the driving force to sustain the long and often tedious learning process”.

Although these opinions are not exactly the same, they all show that motivation refers to the strong and powerful reason which involves demanding effort, arousing desire and raising expectations to promote learning process.

1.1.2. Related studies on motivation in second language learning

The history of research on motivation in second language learning was divided into three main periods by Dửrnyei (2005): the social psychological stage (1959–1990), the cognitive-situated phase (during the 1990s), and the process-oriented period (since 2000).

In the first period, Gardner (1985) introduces his social psychological model which distinguishes between two motivational orientations: instrumental versus integrative motivation. Instrumental motivation relates to a desire to learn a second language for practical reasons such as passing an exam, getting a better job or travelling abroad.

Integrative motivation reflects a desire to learn a second language to interact and identify with the target language community. In the socio-educational model, integrativeness and attitudes toward the learning situation (Gardner, 1985 ; Masgoret and Gardner, 2003) are considered two main variables which had an influence on learner motivation. Integrativeness is assessed by attitudes toward the target language group, interest in foreign languages, and integrative orientation. Attitudes toward the learning situation are measured by attitudes toward both the language course and the language teacher.

During the cognitive-situated period, various models were made to define motivation in terms of different components. For example, the well-recognized expectancy-value model was developed by Eccles, Wigfield, and their colleagues (Wigfield & Eccles, 2000; Wigfield, Eccles, & Rodriguez, 1998). This model considers expectations of success and subjective task value to be direct determinants of achievement-related choices. One of the dominant language learning motivation studies is the self- determination theory which was designed by Deci and Ryan (1985). In this theory, motivation is classified into two main categories: intrinsic and extrinsic motivation.

Extrinsic motivation refers to a desire to get a reward and avoid punishment. It emphasizes “external need to persuade the learner to take part in learning activity such as homework, grade, or doing something to please teachers” (Arnold, 2000, p.

14). Intrinsic motivation refers to “learning itself having its own reward” (Arnold, 2000, p. 14). It means that the need comes from inside; therefore, the learners are willingly try to learn what they think it is worth or important for them without rewards.

Crookes and Schmidt (1991) broadens Gardner’s model by including four motivation constituents: interest, relevance, expectancy, and reward or punishment.

According to a process-oriented model proposed by Dửrnyei (2005), the motivational process can be separated into three phases: pre-actional stage (choice motivation), action stage (executive motivation), and post-actional stage (motivational retrospection). Considerably, Schmidt and Watanabe (2001) identify thirteen motivational factors. The definitions of the thirteen major categories of motivation in this study are as follows (Schmidt and Watanabe, 2001, p.316-317):

 Intrinsic motivation, statements expressing enjoyment of language learning.

 Instrumental orientation, statements concerning the financial, social, or other benefits of learning a language.

 Integrative orientation, statements about being able to interact with members of another cultural group.

 Heritage language orientation, statements concerning the students’ attachment to the language as part of their own identity and cultural heritage.

 Interest in foreign languages and cultures, in general (not a specific language).

 Task value, that is, the value of the language course.

 Expectancy, statements concerning a student’s belief that s/he will do well and receive a good grade in the course.

 Anxiety, statements concerning test and speaking anxiety.

 Language aptitude, the student’s own perception of her/his aptitude for grammar, pronunciation.

 Competitiveness, statements about doing better than other students and getting good grades.

 Cooperativeness, statements concerning relationships with other students and the teacher and learning in a cooperative environment

 Motivational strength, statements concerning one’s intention to put one’s best effort into learning the language, keep up with the course, etc.

In short, it is obvious that no model can cover exactly all the features of language learning motivation. However, what the mentioned- above authors offer is to aim at finding out the nature of motivation and types of motivation in L2 learning.

Significantly, four types of motivation are frequently used in studies on L2 acquisition, namely instrumental motivation, integrative motivation, intrinsic motivation and extrinsic motivation. Furthermore, the motivational scale developed by Schmidt and Watanabe (2001) with thirteen motivational factors is also considered a popular instrument to measure motivation in language learning.

1.2. The overview of language learning strategies 1.2.1. Definition of learning strategies

Chamot (1987, p.71) gives a definition of language learning strategies as “techniques, approaches or deliberate actions that students take in order to facilitate the learning and recall of both linguistic and content area information”. She proposes that some language learning strategies are observable, but some may not be observable. Oxford (1990, p.1) claims “learning strategies are steps taken by students to enhance their own learning”. She proposed a more specific definition of learning strategies as “specific actions taken by the learner to make learning easier, faster, more enjoyable, more self- directed, more effective, and more transferable to new situations” (Oxford, 1990, p.8).

In cognitive perspective, O’Malley and Chamot (1990, p.1) view language learning strategies as “the special thoughts behaviors of processing information that individuals use to help them comprehend, learn, or retain new information”. Ellis (1994) defines learning strategies by listing the main characteristics of learning strategies. According to Cross and Steadman (1996), learning strategies are methods of learning that help learners acquire information. Moreover, Cohen (1998, p.4) proposes the term of learning strategies as “those processes which are consciously selected by learners and which may result in action taken to enhance the learning or use of a second or foreign language, through the storage, retention, recall, and application of information about that language”.

In conclusion, from above researchers’ definition, language learning strategies can be viewed as special techniques or methods that individuals use to facilitate their L2 learning and enhance learning achievement.

1.2.2. Related studies on language learning strategies

Language learning strategy has been categorized in diverse ways. The search for

drawn to what makes a person a good language learner. Other studies conducted by Naiman, Frohlich, Stern, and Todesco (1978), Rubin (1981), O’Malley, Chamot, Stewner-Manzanares, Kupper and Russo (1985) identified language learning strategy as an extremely sharp tool of language learning. Rubin (1975) defines good language learner as the one who grabs every chances to practice language skills and communicate with other people without hesitation. In addition, Oxford regards good language learners as those who use more and better learning strategies than bad language learners do.

Oxford (1990) defines Language learning strategies (LLS) as specific methods or techniques employed by individual learners to facilitate their comprehension, retention, retrieval and application of information in a second or foreign language. Learning strategies are divided into two types: direct and indirect learning by Rubin (1981). Six direct strategies are: clarification/verification; monitoring; memorization;

guessing/inductive inference; deductive reasoning; and practice. Two indirect strategies include: creating opportunities for practice; and production tricks.

Oxford (1990) organized a questionnaire with 50 items known as the Strategy Inventory for Language Learning (SILL), a research instrument used to assess the degree to which learners use various strategies when studying a language. The definitions of the six major categories of L2 learning strategies in SILL are as follows (Oxford, 1990, p. 18–21; 2001, p. 167–168):

 Cognitive strategies: processing information and structuring it, for example, reasoning, analyzing, summarizing (14 items).

 Memory strategies: remembering information by making connections, for example, grouping, using keywords, imagery, rhyming and structured reviewing (9 items).

 Metacognitive strategies: managing the learning process and dealing with the task, for example, paying attention, planning for language tasks, consciously searching

for practice chances, identifying/ selecting resources; self-evaluating one’s progress and monitoring errors (9 items).

 Compensation strategies: compensating for knowledge gaps, such as guessing meanings from the context in reading and listening, using synonyms/ gestures to convey meaning (6 items).

 Affective strategies: identifying one’s affective traits and knowing how to manage them, such as anxiety reduction, self-encouragement and self-reward (6 items).

 Social strategies: learning from and/or with others, such as asking for cooperation, working in pairs/ groups, cooperating with native speakers of the language and becoming culturally aware (6 items).

Oxford’s SILL has been widely used by researchers from different EFL contexts and become a standardized instrument with different versions for language learners of a variety of languages. Therefore, later studies conducted by Park (1995), Liao (2000), Li (2010), Griffiths & Parr (2001), Khamkhien (2006) and Zhao (2009) applied this instrument to investigate learners’ strategy use.

To sum up, six main categories of L2 learning strategies in Oxford’s SILL (1990):

memory, cognitive, metacognitive, compensation, affective and social strategies have been applied for many studies as the theoretical framework to find out what strategies learners often use in studying English.

1.3. Related previous studies on the relationship between motivations and language learning strategies

Ellis (1994, p.529) states that “individual learner differences (beliefs, affective strategies, general factors and previous learning experiences) together with various situational factors (the target language being studied, whether the setting is formal or informal, the nature of the instruction, and the specific tasks learner are asked to perform) determine the learner’ choice of learning strategies”. This explanation

emphasizes on variables that influence to choose suitable learning strategies. One of the strongest factors affecting learners’ strategy use is motivation (Oxford & Nyikos, 1989).

The significant link between language learning motivation and strategy use was explored by many studies such as Oxford & Nyikos, 1989; Oxford, Oh, Ito, & Sumrall, 1993; Schmidt & Watanabe, 2001. Motivation is the most significant factor influencing language learning strategy use in a study of 1200 university students (Oxford and Nykios, 1989), and is also strongly related to learning strategy use among 107 high school students of Japanese (Oxford, Park-Oh, Ito and Sumrall, 1993). Ehrman and Oxford (1995) also find that motivation factors have strong correlation with language learning strategies. The results from this study revealed that SILL mean correlated positively and significantly with many aspects of motivations, for example, total motivation (r=0.44, p<0.05), intrinsic motivation (r=0.33, p<0.01) and desire to use the language outside class (r= 0.31, p<0.05). Therefore, the overall use of language learning strategies was linked with motivation and desire to use the language outside of class. This study also reveals in that it signified that “users of cognitive strategies for language learning are a confident, positive, highly motivated lot who exhibit strong arousal (Oxford & Ehrman, 1995, p.377). The same study demonstrates that the use of metacognitive strategies was positively correlated with intrinsic motivation (r= 0.46, p<0.01). To put it differently, users of metacognitive strategies tend to be internally motivated, self-confident and emotionally energized.

A study on high school students’ strategy use in learning Japanese as a foreign language by Oxford, Park-Oh, Ito and Sumrall (1993) reveals that strategy use was strongly correlated with instrumental motivation and integrative motivation. An analysis from an exploratory study of Japanese and Spanish language learners indicates

significant correlations existing between motivation and L2 strategies in both groups of language learners by Okada et al. (1996).

Schmidt and Watanabe (2001) carried out a survey research which mentioned motivation, strategy use and pedagogical preferences of 2089 students of five different foreign languages at the University of Hawai’i. They identified the following six factors: value; expectancy; motivation strength, competitiveness, heritage and cooperativeness with four strategy factors: study skills strategies, cognitive strategies, coping strategies and social strategies in strong correlations with each other. The results indicated that the overall strategy use was significantly correlated with the overall motivation. Motivational strength was the strongest predictor of strategy use, followed by value, and cooperativeness.

In conclusion, motivation is one of the most important factors affecting in second language learning strategies. The results of the studies indicated that the motivation and English learning strategies were significantly and positively correlated with each other.

It is obvious from Ehrman and Oxford (1995) that learners who have intrinsic motivation are likely to use a wide range of learning strategies and achieve more than those who do not. Besides, other types of motivation such as instrumental orientations, integrative orientations and motivational strength have strong effect on learners’ choice of strategies.

It can be said that many researchers took Gardner and Lambert’s theory of attitudes and motivation (1972) as the light for the framework of their studies; however, based on each circumstance, they should use these terms interchangeably. Therefore, it would be better if further studies might focus on practical aspects of motivation and learning strategies in application into language teaching and learning. This might be due to the fact that the students who often got a high grade average in English courses tended to be interested in English learning and get effective strategy uses.

The overall mean of six motivational types