luận văn thạc sĩ nghiên cứu tình huống về động lực học tập ngôn ngữ thứ hai của sinh viên khiếm thị tại một trường đại học trên địa bàn hà nội​

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI UNIVERSITY OF
LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES FACULTY OF POSTGRADUATE STUDIES

NGÔ PHƯƠNG THANH

SECOND LANGUAGE LEARNING MOTIVATION:
A CASE STUDY OF STUDENTS WITH VISUAL IMPAIRMENT
AT A UNIVERSITY IN HANOI
(Nghiên cứu tình huống về động lực học tập ngơn ngữ thứ hai của sinh viên
khiếm thị tại một trường Đại học trên địa bàn Hà Nội)

MA THESIS – TYPE 1

Field: English Teaching Methodology
Code: 8140231.01

HANOI – 2020


VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI UNIVERSITY OF
LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES FACULTY OF POST GRADUATE STUDIES

NGÔ PHƯƠNG THANH

SECOND LANGUAGE LEARNING MOTIVATION:
A CASE STUDY OF STUDENTS WITH VISUAL IMPAIRMENT
AT A UINVERSITY IN HANOI
(Nghiên cứu tình huống về động lực học tập ngơn ngữ thứ hai của sinh viên
khiếm thị tại một trường Đại học trên địa bàn Hà Nội)

MA THESIS – TYPE 1

Field: English Teaching Methodology
Code: 8140231.01
Supervisor: Dr. Mai Ngoc Khoi

HANOI – 2020


DECLARATION
I hereby state that the paper is the result of my own work in partial
fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of Art of Faculty at Postgraduate Studies, University of Languages and International Studies, Vietnam
National University of Hanoi. This research has not been submitted to any other
universities or intuitions.
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.
Signature

Ngo Phuong Thanh
November 23, 2019

i


ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
First and foremost, I am much honored to be supervised by Mr. Mai Ngoc
Khoi, to whom I would like to send my deepest gratitude. It is him who gave me the
confidence to work on visual impairment students – the subject that brought me a
lot of inspiration. I am too lucky to have you as my mentor. It is obvious that

without your all-around supervision and guidance, this thesis could not be finished.
In addition, all my heart is dedicated to my parents, who have been standing
by my side, giving me tender care and support to tirelessly work on this paper.
Without you – my source of motivation, I would never have enough courage to
finish the research.
Moreover, many thanks should go to my boy friend Mr. Truong Hoang Long
for his continuous encouragement. I fully appreciate your advice when I got lost
with my thesis.
Besides, I would like to thank my class classmates for being my motivation
to complete this paper.
Last but not least, the research is dedicated to me myself – the brave strong
girl who have gone through many struggles and constantly tried hard on this road. I
deserve to be proud of myself.

ii


ABSTRACT
The purpose of this work is to explore the motivation of students with visual
impairment through their longitudinal L2 learning journey. To this end, the research
was conducted with two Vietnamese sightless learners at a University in Hanoi. The
students‘ language learning autobiography and semi-structured interview were
employed to collect data. Three findings emerged from the data analysis. Firstly,
sightless students had clear goals for learning English such as to get an English –
related job, to communicate with other L2 speakers or to enhance knowledge.
Secondly,their motivated learning behaviours were impacted by L2 learning
experiences. Thirdly,they recognized learning difficulties as a source of motivation.
Based on the findings, the thesis strongly suggests that parents and teachers should
empower sightless students to have a dream and shape their future L2 self by
providing them with a supportive and comfortable learning environment.

iii


TABLE OF CONTENTS
DECLARATION...................................................................................................... i
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS.................................................................................... ii
ABSTRACT...........................................................................................................iii
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION.......................................................................... 1
CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW............................................................... 5
2.1. Motivation.......................................................................................................... 5
2.1.1. Definitions of Motivation................................................................................ 5
2.1.2. Definition of L2 Motivation............................................................................ 5
2.2. Previous Research on Motivation and L2 Motivation........................................ 6
2.2.1. The History of Motivation Research................................................................ 6
2.2.2. Traditional Approaches to L2 Learning Motivation......................................10
2.2.3. The L2 Motivation Revolution in the 1990s.................................................. 12
2.2.4. Recent L2 Motivational Theories & The L2 Motivational Self System........16
2.3. Visual Impairment............................................................................................ 20
2.4. Previous Research on L2 Motivation of Impaired Students.............................21
2.5. Previous Research on the Education of Visually Impaired Students in Vietnam
................................................................................................................................ 22
2.6. Research Gap................................................................................................... 23
CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY....................................................................... 24
3.1. Research methodology..................................................................................... 24
3.2. The setting of the study and participants.......................................................... 25
3.3. Data collection instruments and procedures..................................................... 27
3.3.1. Language learning autobiographies............................................................... 28
3.3.2. Interview....................................................................................................... 29
3.4. Data analysis methods...................................................................................... 29

3.5. The Portrait of Participants............................................................................... 30
Summary................................................................................................................ 34

iv


CHAP 4: FINGDINGS.......................................................................................... 35
4.1. Rationales for L2 learning................................................................................ 35
4.2. L2 learning experiences.................................................................................... 43
4.3. L2 learning difficulties..................................................................................... 48
CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSIONS & DISCUSSION.............................................. 55
Conclusion 1........................................................................................................... 55
Conclusion 2........................................................................................................... 58
Conclusion 3........................................................................................................... 59
IMPLICATIONS..................................................................................................... 60
REFERENCES...................................................................................................... 64
APPENDICES.......................................................................................................... I
Appendix A................................................................................................................ I
Appendix B.............................................................................................................. V
Appendix C............................................................................................................. VI
Appendix D.......................................................................................................... XIX
Appendix D......................................................................................................XXXII

v


CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
1. Rationales for the study
Along with research in the field of English language learning and teaching
history, second language (L2) learning motivation has always brought great passion

and interest to the researcher. The researcher, through her teaching experience,
realized that learning motivation plays a vital role in students‘ process of language
learning. Consequently, the researcher has insistently sought ways to motivate her
students as well as enhance their positive learning experience. This attempt drove
the researcher to do a study of L2 learning motivation.
Moreover, the researcher believes that it is necessary to conduct a qualitative
research which presents a close look at individual learners by taking learners‘
difference and identity into account. It is undeniable that L2 learning motivation has
constantly received noticeable attention of researchers and teachers. However, the
majority of researchon L2 learning motivation focuses only on the stable and
generalized motives of learners (Zaragoza, 2011). For example, many studies
applying quantitative approach investigate learners‘ contemporary motives in a
specific time and ignore their past and future motivation. Besides, by collecting a
large range of participants, these studies try to single out the most noticeable and
common motives but ignores learning differences and dynamic feature of
motivation.
Finally, it is the cases of students with visual impairment in the researcher‘s
institution that urged her to do research on L2 language motivation of sightless
learners. In the context of Vietnam education, there are few language universities,
such as University of Languages and International Studies, accepting students with
visual impairment. Realizing their learning difficulties, especially when these
institutions have not provided enough support for these special learners, the
researcher decided to study their learning motivation that was believed to keep them
pursuing L2 learning and overcome learning barriers. Therefore, the recent research

1


brings in an insight into language learning motivation as well as learning barriers of
sightless students who are attending University of Languages and International

Studies as well as the researcher‘s institution. The researcher conducted this paper
aiming at investigating the L2 learning motivation through the lens of sightless
students as considering their L2 self and identity.
2. Statement of research questions
The research was conducted to seek the answers for the following question:
What factors affect second language learning motivation of visually impaired
students?
3. Aims& objectives of the study
First of all, the study aims to explore what motivate students with visual
impairment to learn L2 before and after they enter the University. Secondly, it is to
investigate what factors impact on their L2 learning motivation.
4. Scope of the study
The aim of the study is to investigate the language learning motivation of
students with visual impairment in and outside classroom setting. Therefore, the two
visually impaired students at University of Language in International Studies were
selected as the targeted population of the research. The selection of core participants
based on three criteria: visual impairment, previous academic background and
willingness to join the research. The research was conducted at Faculty of English
Language Teacher Education of the university, which is the biggest provider of
English teachers for the whole country. Every student in this faculty is English
major and future English teacher, so it is important for them to master English
language. Moreover, this faculty accepts students with visual impairment and
recently there are some sightless students attending it. Therefore, it might be the
best context to carry out the research of language learning motivation of visually
impaired students.

2


5. Methods of the study

The study employs case study to investigate what motivate visually impaired
students to learn L2. The research goals are achieved by means of qualitative data.
The study was carried out by some steps as follows:
First, the language learning autobiography was employed to find out their
second language learning stories in the connection with learning motivation.
Second, personal interviews with two students were conducted in order to:
 Study their rationales for learning


Study their past and present learning experience to find out how L2

learning motivation was generated and changed
 Find out the difficulties in students‘ L2 language learning and their
impacts on L2 motivation.
Then, the data were collected, sorted and analyzed qualitatively to obtain
realistic results.
To end with, pedagogical implications for enhancing students‘ motivation in
L2 language learning was proposed based on the results found from all data
collection instruments.
6. Significance of the study
The study is considered to be significant for some reasons. Firstly, the results
will, for a certain extent, help the English teachers and parents who are educating
and fostering visually impaired students raise awareness of the importance of
motivation in L2 learning. Secondly, the paper is expected to contribute information
on sightless students‘ L2 learning motivation, as the second language education for
students with disabilities has not received enough concern. Hopefully, the study will
bring about the insight into language learning motivation and barriers of sightless
students to others who are learning or are going to learn the English language, and
then, encourage them to step forward on their English language learning journey

3


with essential preparation. Finally, the study might be a source of material for
students to study motivation in learning from the lens of sightless people.
7. Design of the study
This research consists of five chapters:
Chapter 1: Introduction
This chapter aims at stating the research problems as well as the significance
of the study, proposing questions to answer, and explaining the used methodology.
Chapter 2: Literature review
This includes the explanation of key definitions of Motivation, L2 learning
motivation and L2 motivational self-system. Moreover, it presents the review on
different previous works on Motivation and L2 Motivation to point out the research
gaps.
Chapter 3: Methodology
This chapterpresents research methodology;the setting of the study and
participants;data collection instruments and procedures. The portrait of participants
is also clearly analysed in this chapter
Chapter 4: Findings
This chapter presents the findings of the data analysis, which will be divided
into four parts: portrait of two learners, rationales for learning, learning experience
and learning difficulties. After that, the data will be explained by using L2
motivational self system.
Chapter 5: Conclusions
In this chapter, the three conclusions of the paper will be presented.

4

CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1. Motivation
―Motivation is, without question, the most complex and challengingissue
facing teachers today.‖ (Scheidecker & Freeman, 1999)
2.1.1. Definitions of Motivation
It is widely accepted that motivation is a fundamental constituent of the
learning and teaching process. Although the term ―motivation‖ is frequently used
in both educational practice and study contexts, no consensus has been reached
among researchers on the exact definition of motivation (Dornyei, 1998).
Analogously, Steel and Konig (2006) also share the same viewpoint about the
inconsistent definition of motivation and put forth the reason as for the complexity
of ―intricate and realistic situation‖ that motivation and motivational subsets occur.
In spite of the inconsistency of the term definition, most researchers seem to agree
that motivation involves ―the choice of a particular action, the persistence with it
and the effort expended on it‖ (Dornyei, 2000, p. 520). In a broader sense, it is
understood as the reasons, desire and willingness for acting in a certain way,
according to Oxford Advanced Learners Dictionaries. Hence, a motivation study is
the study of why people think and behave as they do (Graham & Weiner, 2006).
2.1.2. Definition of L2 Motivation
Motivation was initially studied seriously in the language learning realm as
social psychologist recognized its strong impact of social and cultural elements on
learners‘ academic achievement (Dörnyei, 2003). In the educational field, the most
influential motivation theory in second language acquisition is proposed by Gardner
(2001) with the revised definition of motivation as ―a central element along with
language aptitude in determining success in learning another language in the
classroom setting‖ (p. 2). Similarly, Crookes and Schmidt (1991) defined motivation
to learn a second language as the learner's orientation regarding the goal of learning
a second language. According to the present author‘s knowledge, L2

5


motivation is concerned with the reason why a learner studies L2, the persistence
and willingess to pursue it and the desire to succeed in learning it. Once more,
―Motivation, like the concept of gravity, is easier to describe (in terms of its
outward, observable effects) than it is to define. Of course, this has not stopped
people from trying it.‖ (Covington, as cited in Dornyei, 2001, p.7). Due to the
complexity of motivation, the history of motivation in second language teaching and
learning has witnessed various debates when researchers study it.
2.2. Previous Research on Motivation and L2 Motivation
2.2.1. The History of Motivation Research
In education and psychology fields, different researchers suggest their own
different way to approach students‘ motivation in acquisition second language.
Hence, educators witness almost hundred motivational theories such as
Socioeducational model (Gardner, 1985), Expectancy-Value Theory (Martin,
1970s), Attribution Theory (Bernard, 1970s), so on and so forth. According to
Graham and Weiner (2006), ―the development of theory in the field of motivation
has had disparate impact at different points in history‖(p.63). Through the history of
scientific theories of motivation, a wide range of studies and practices have
emerged, developed and reformed. In this chapter of the study, the researcher will
provide an overview of the growth and changes in this field.
There are two main approaches toward motivation: ―Mechanistic approach‖
and ―Cognitive approach‖ (Graham & Weiner, 2006). The mechanistic approach was
raised at the beginning of its history. The theories belonging to the mechanistic period
(1930-1960) try to understand ―what moved a resting organism into a state of
activity‖, with heavy reliance on concepts such as instinct, drive, need, energisation,
and homeostasis (Weiner, 1990). Pintrich and Schunk (2002) found out in their survey
of motivation in education that human behaviour was mainly perceived in many
primary explanations as 'mechanistic', nonhuman action and following the principles of

laws of nature (as cited in Lamb, 2007). The two most noticeable theories of this
approach, Hull‘s Drive theory and Lewin‘s Field Theory, had their

6


own formulas to measure human motivation. According to Hull‘s Drive theory,
when a response toward a stimulus was followed by a satisfying state of affairs, the
strength of the bond between that stimulus and response would be increased, and
then, formed a new habit. Hence, he proposed a formula: Behaviour = Drive x habit.
Lewin‘s Field Theory, on the other hand, stated that behaviour was determined by
both person and environment (Behaviour = f(P,E). It was agreed by Hull & Lewin
that motivated behaviour determined by needs of the person (tension/drive), a
priority of the goal object, and a directional variable (Graham & Weiner, 2006). This
period clearly brought influence upon most of the theories in L2 motivation that
formed later.
However, the 1960s brought about important changes. The mechanistic views
of behaviourism went through the counter opinion of humanistic psychologists such
as Carl Rogers and Abraham Maslow. Proposed by Maslow in 1970 (as cited by
Dornyei, 2001), the famous ―Hierarchy of Needs‖ distinguished between five basic
classes of needs, which were defined as:
•

physiological needs (e.g. hunger, thirst, sexual frustration);

•
safety needs (need for security, order and protection from pain and
fear);

•

•

love needs (need for love, affection and social acceptance);

•

esteem needs (need to gain competence, approval and recognition);

self-actualisation needs (need to realise one's potential and capabilities,

and gain understanding and insight).
According to the hierarchy, physiologically based needs have to be satisfied
first, before we can strive for the deeper happiness and fulfillment that comes from
satisfying our higher-level needs. Hence, he stated that ―the central motivating force

in people's lives (unlike in rats' or dogs') is the self-actualising tendency, that is the
desire to achieve personal growth and to develop fully the capacities and talents we
have inherited.‖ (Dornyei, 2001, p.8)
In the second half of the 20th century, the ―cognitive revolution‖ in
psychology transformed our views of motivation; instead of being explained as

7


machines with instinct behaviours, ―humans were seen as essentially rational
creatures guided by their own thoughts and beliefs about the world and their place
in it‖ (Lamb, 2007, p.19). As stated by Dornyei (2001), cognitive theories ―places
the focus on how the individual's conscious attitudes, thoughts, beliefs, and
interpretation of events influence their behaviour; that is, how mental processes are

transformed into action. (...) In other words, whether people decide to do something
is determined first by their beliefs about the values of the action, and then about
their evaluation of whether they are up to the challenge and whether the support
they are likely to get from the people and institutes around them is sufficient.‖ (p.8).
Within the overall cognitive view of motivation that characterises the field,
there is a surprising number of alternative or competing sub-theories. Created by
Dornyei (2001), the table below might provide the readers with an overview of
motivation theories belonging to the cognitive approach.
THEORIES

Expectancy –
value theory

Achievement
motivation
theory

Self – efficacy
theory

Attribution



Self-worth
theory
Goal setting
theory

Goal

orientation
theory

Selfdetermination
theory

Social
motivation
theory

Theory of
planned
behaviour

The reason for this diversity might lie on the variety of motives that can
potentially influencehuman behaviour.
As cited in Dornyei‘s research (2001), the spirit of the general psychology of
motivation in this period was largely impacted by two sets of theories: ―expectancy-


value theories‖ and ―attribution theories‖, which was initiated by Lewin's ―resultant
valence theory‖ and Atkinson's ―theory of achievement motivation‖ and Rotter's
―social learning theory‖ respectively. The common principle behind the theories is

9


that "individuals maximize their hedonic pursuits by selecting those activities with
the highest likelihood of reaching the most valued goal" (Weiner, 1992). In other
word, people pursue activities they deem valuable and relevant to the personal goals

that they desire to reach.
In a nutshell, the history of motivation research has proved the surprising
variety of theories. Despite its limitation, each theory has its own influence in the
development of the field, and each has contributed to our understanding of
motivation in its own unique way.
2.2.2. Traditional Approaches to L2 Learning Motivation
Besides the development of motivation research, L2 learning motivation
research shows an evolution from the social psychological explanation of the
connection between motivation and L2 achievement to the effort to establish a more
comprehensive accounting for the complex and multifaceted concept of motivation
in different contexts (Lee, 2001).
Early research in L2 motivation (from around 1960) witnessed the
germination of socio-psychological period, which includes the development of
many theories. Examples of such theories are Gardner and his colleagues‘ theory of
L2 motivation (e.g., Gardner & Lambert, 1972; Gardner & MacIntyre, 1993),
linguistic self-confidence (e.g., Clément, 1980), intergroup model (e.g., Giles &
Byrne, 1982) and acculturation theory (e.g., Schumann, 1978).
For about three decades until the late 1980s, the majority of significant
research regarding motivation in L2 learning was stemmed and developed in a
social-psychological framework by two Canadian psychologists, Roh C. Gardner
and Wallace E. Lambert.The Socio-educational model of motivation developed by
Gardner and Lambert‘s (1970s) draws an important relationship between motivation
and orientation or ―goal‖. In their view, "motivation refers to the combination of
effort plus desire to achieve the goal of learning the language plus favorable
attitudes toward learning and language‖ (Lee, 2001).

10


OTHER

SUPPORT

INTERGRATIVENESS
OTHER
FACTORS

MOTIVATION

ATTITUDE TOWARD
LEARNING STUATION
LANGUAGE
ACHIVEMENT

LANGUAGE
APTITUTE

Basic Model of the Role of Aptitude and Motivation in Second Language
Acquisition (Gardner, as cited in Dornyei, 2001)
The authors proposed two terms that are commonly used in the field of
motivation: Integrative orientation refers to the positive disposition of an individual
to learn a language, its culture, and its community. On the other hand, instrumental
orientation refers to the practical reasons of an individual to learn a language such
as being hired, getting a good salary, passing an exam and travelling abroad.
After three decades of development with rare challenges, the socialpsychological framework has to face with increasing criticisms. According to
Keblabi (n.d.), most criticisms were raised against the concept of integrative
motivation and its definition. The notion of integrative motivation has no parallel in
mainstream motivational psychology. Dornyei (2005), on the other hand,
categorized Gardner et al.‘s studies as ―macroperspective‖ as these researches have
focused on specific groups‘ L2 learning motivation, not on each L2 learner‘s
individual motivation. This limitation might also be seen in the other studies which

rely on a quantitative approach.
11


In all, at this stage of history of L2 motivation, Gardner proposed most of the
theories in L2 motivation (Guerrero, 2015). There were other theories about
motivation after Gardner and Lambert. However, they also place the focus on the
importance of attitudes and feelings of language learners towards the L2
communities and the L2.
2.2.3. The L2 Motivation Revolution in the 1990s
In the 1990s, there was a shift from a social psychological view of
motivation to more educational and cognitive views. The current spirit in L2
motivation research is characterized by the cognitive approach, which intended to
―bring the focus of the investigation back to the psychological field emphasizing
mainly cognition (or mental processes)‖ (Guerrero, 2015, p.98). In this period, the
learning contexts and the needs of the students and teachers in the classroom were
considered more significant than the community and the social context. Such moves
were led by Crookes and Schmidt (1991) who called for a ―Reopening [of] the
research agenda‖ of L2 motivation. In this article, they urged language educators to
look beyond the dominant socialpsychological model of motivation and in particular
to question whether ―attitudes‖ or ―goal orientations‖ are good predictors of actual
learning behaviour:
―When teachers say that a studentis motivated, they are not usually
concerning themselves with the student's reason for studying, but are observing that
the student does study, or at least engage in teacher desired behaviour in the
classroom and possibly outside"
(Crookes & Schmidt, 1991: 480)
According to Lee (2001), Crookes and Schmidt (1991) stated that the L2
learner plays an active role at many levels of the learning process. In this respect,
they attempt to explain the relationship between motivation and L2 learning at four

different levels:
(1)

the micro level, which deals with motivational effects on the cognitive

processing of L2 stimuli.,

12


(2) the classroom level, dealing with techniques and activities in motivational
terms;
(3) the syllabus level, at which content decisions come into play; and
(4) considerations relevant to informal, out-of-class, and long-term
factors
(p. 483).
On the other hand, the researchers proved the limitation of Gardner's works
and other researches of social psychology framework by pointing out that these
studies put too much focus on social dimension, and in effect, ignored other
essential aspects of motivation. New L2 motivation constructs were proposed to fill
this gap and then, showed that there was more to motivation such as interest,
relevance, expectancy, and outcomes. Dornyei‘s (1994) framework of L2
motivation is an elaborate example:
LANGUAGE LEVEL
LEARNER LEVEL

LEARNING SITUATION LEVEL
Course-specific motivational
components

Teacher-specific motivational
components

Group-specific motivational
Components


In this framework, the researcher offered an extensive list of L2 motivational
components, which is conceptualize into 3 components: language level, learner
level and learning situation level. These levels represented integrative and
instrumental elements, individual characteristics and situation-specific motives
rooted in various aspects of L2 learning within a classroom setting respectively
(Dornyei, 2001). According to Lee (2001), by reflecting three aspects of languages:
the social dimension, the personal dimension and the subject matter dimension, this
mode1 has added ―internal‖ and ―external‖ motivational factors to Gardnerian
account of L2 learning motivation.
In his article ―Motivation in second and foreign language learning‖ (1998),
Dornyei

stated

the

framework‘s

usefulness

as

it

―[emphasised]

the

multidimensional nature of L2 motivation, [pulled] together a number of different
lines of research and [provided] an elaborate enough specification of relevant
motives for the purpose of in-depth analysis of particular learning situations and
design of intervention techniques to enhance them‖ (p.126).However, he also
pointed out that the list lacks an indication of anyrelationships between the
components; the components listed are quite diverse, and then, the framework also
lacks a goal componentand does not reflect sufficiently recent findingsin selfdetermination theory.
Another comprehensive framework is proposed by Williams and Burden
(1997), which categorized motivational components into internal factors and
external factors.

14


INTERNAL FACTORS
Intrinsic interest of activity
. arousal of curiosity
. optimal degree of challenge
Perceived value of activity
. personal relevance
. anticipated value of outcomes
. intrinsic value attributed to the activity
Sense of agency
. locus of causality
. locus of control re: process and

outcomes
. ability to set appropriate goals Mastery
. locus of causality
. feelings of competence
. awareness of developing skills and
mastery in a chosen area
. feelings of competence
. self-efficacy
Self-concept
. realistic awareness of personal
strengths and weaknesses in skills
required
. personal definitions and judgements of
success and failure
. self-worth concern
. learned helplessnessAttitudes
. to language learning in general
. to the target language
. to the target language communityand
culture
Other affective states
. confidence
. anxiety, fear
Developmental age and stage
Gender
It was not until this period that internal and external motivation was
mentioned in a motivation research. Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation in L2 learning
had been investigated in self-determination theory. However, only since

15

the 1990s has intrinsic motivation come to be the main focus in L2 motivation
research. Moreover, the role of teachers‘ impact on students‘ intrinsic and extrinsic
motivation, as well as, student autonomy has also become the main focus of recent
L2 motivational research.
In conclusion, during this period there was a greater interest in learners and
their learning experiences as opposed to the focus on the attitudes towards the L2 in
the previous period. This focus possibly proved to be fundamental for other
researchers in order to understand that L2 motivation was not only influenced by
social and psychological aspects, but it was also influenced by more specific aspects
inside the classroom such as the curriculum, the syllabus, the learners‘ needs, and
the role of the teacher.
2.2.4. Recent L2 Motivational Theories & The L2 Motivational Self System
As reviewed in the previous part, the history of motivation research shows an
evolution from the mechanic view (which explained human behaviour as a response
toward needs and environment) to the cognitive view (which stated human
behaviour was guided by person‘s thought and belief). Along with motivation
research development, L2 motivational theories witness the shift from socialpsychology framework (which tried to investigate the relationship between
motivation to learn L2 with L2 environment) to recent approaches (which focus
more on learners‘ self and their learning experiences). It is obvious that the trend of
motivation and L2 motivational science has been gathering in the personal self. In
other words, motivation actively shaped through personal meaning-making,
intentionality and reflexivity. The reason lies behind this movement might be the
realization that ―individuals and L2 motivation involve a dynamic process rather
than the static conception previously considered‖ (Guerrero, 2015, p. 110). In
addition, it is widely agreed that ―learners are unique and possess different
personal, social, familiar, and professional characteristics that might influence their
motivation towards the L2 learning process‖ (Guerrero, 2015, p. 101). One of the
most influential researchers of the recent study movement is Ushida (2009, as cited

16