Exploring differences in motivation between students who excelled and under performed in learning English Language

1. Khoo Hooi Shyan
The University of Nottingham Graduate School

3. The study attempts to answer the following research questions:
1. What are the motivation levels of underperforming students learning
English language?
2. What are the motivation levels of students who excel in learning English
language?
3. How can the underperformers’ motivation levels be improved?
“ Hard to define
multi-faceted
concept ”
(Dörnyei, 2001)
“ More researches
needed ”
(Ushioda, 2008)
“ Sharing from
teachers would be
greatly beneficial ”
(Ushioda, 2008)

4. Theoretical Framework
• Based on the tripartite motivation construct of developed by Dörnyei
et al. (2006)
• Had been tested in the Asian context of China, Japan and Iran by
researchers Taguchi, Magid, & Papi in 2009
Learner-internal factor Social psychological milieu Pragmatic
Need for achievement Sociocultural Instrumentality
Motivational intensity Family orientation Integrativeness
Attitudes toward learning English Friendship orientation
Perceived group cohesion Anxiety in class
English use anxiety
Attitudes towards learning English

5. Methodology
• A mixed method approach is chosen questionnaire (quantitative)
interview with English Language teachers (qualitative)
• This method enables the researcher to get a richer data from the integration of two different perspectives:
teachers and students (Creswell, 2003)
Pilot study: Survey
forms with Chinese
translation given to
four students from
Form 2 and Form 3
Respondents indicate
their motivational
levels (1 - ‘strongly
disagree’ and 6 -
‘strongly agree’)
Students list down their
English Language marks
from their final
examination for filtering
Researcher will be
present during the
distribution of
questionnaire
Students are allowed to
take home with
them the
questionnaires for
completion
A short dialogue is
conducted with
the subject
teachers

6. Findings
Figure 1 Motivation levels of excellent and underperformed students
Indicator: 1 – Low; 2 – Moderately Low; 3 – Slightly Low;
4 – Slightly High; 5 – Moderately High; 6 – High

7. Excellent students Underperformed students
More concerned with the pragmatic benefits of
learning the target language
Less attentive to the pragmatic objectives of learning
More assured of their competence Less confident in succeeding in their learning
More intrinsically motivated Less intrinsically motivated
Exert more effort into their school work Fewer attempts were exercised in the process of
acquisition
Possess higher level of enthusiasm and conviction in
their learning of English
Did not see the point of learning English

8. • Ratings were tied in orientations of family, sociocultural, need for achievement
and perceived group cohesion
• Likely explanations:
Parents or family members saw little need of exerting pressure to someone who
were already internally motivated
Underperformers could be ignorant towards the families’ believes of academic
achievement
Excellent and underperformed students shared the same level of appreciation
towards its media products (e.g., movies, television programmes, reading
materials, music)
They were as equally motivated to learn without feeling the need to succeed,
they might not view L2 achievement affecting their perceived overall competence
As it was an independent school with a class size of thirty, students were generally
satisfied

9. • Teachers should concentrate on developing skills in motivating learners (Dörnyei, 1998)
• Dörnyei et al. (2006) emphasized on the importance of integrative factors in promoting L2
learning:
• Teachers should encourage students to have a perceptive mentality towards the L2 and its speakers
• Teachers could familiarize students on cross-cultural awareness or share positive L2 related experience
• Teachers could expose students to L2 cultural content and supplement lessons with authentic materials
• Teachers could invite L2 speakers or organize school trips to L2 community and alike
• Imparting intrinsic values in students would improve motivation levels (Pintrich & De Groot,
1990):
• Teacher could raise students’ awareness on self-regulating strategies such as having achievable learning
goals, planning, monitoring students’ understanding and encouraging persistence in students
• Most students’ motivation can be worked on and increased
• Teachers do not have to resort to the conventional methods of reward and punishment

10. • What are the motivation levels of underperforming students learning English language?
• They are of slightly high level
• The students were showed to be less keen in acquiring target language for pragmatic gains, less concerned with its
culture, had a more negative attitude towards learning English and were more anxious in using the language
• Their teacher commented likewise that the students needed constant push to learn
• What are the motivation levels of students who excel in learning English language?
• Students are of moderately high level
• They were more welcoming towards the target language, more goal oriented, exhibited better attitude and showed
more internal motivation
• Their teacher mentioned that they were keen in learning and were frequently pushing themselves to do better
• How can the underperformers’ motivation levels be improved?
• Teacher could cultivate a positive, cross-cultural interests among students, consciously impart intrinsic
value in raising the motivation levels in underperforming students. Students would need to have
interest and positive dispositions for increased motivation in learning a second language.

11. Limitations
• There are several limitations to these findings:
• It can be recommended that a more elaborate research with all its
constituents be carried out in future
All the responses were
measured with a self-
report instrument
Unmarked answers
where students left the
columns blank
Sample participants
being confined
A segmented research

12. Thank you.
Exploring Differences in Motivation between Students Who Excelled and
Underperformed in Learning English Language
Khoo Hooi Shyan
The University of Nottingham Graduate School