Motivation

Motivation and Its Role in Language Acquisition

Robert A. Cote SLAT 596Y Dr. Linda Waugh December 15, 2004

Motivation

Motivation represents one of the most appealing, yet complex, variables used to explain individual differences in language learning (MacIntyre et al. 2001, p. 462). These words succinctly describe the multifaceted issue that researchers, classroom instructors and language learners themselves have faced since Gardner and Lambert brought to light the complexities of motivation via their studies in the late 1950s. The number of factors involved in motivating persons to acquire a foreign language has increased tremendously during the past four decades and attempting to address all of these components in one paper is impractical. The author will therefore attempt to present a limited overview of motivation, supporting research from both inside and outside of the classroom and views challenging its validity. Prior to exploring motivation and its function in language acquisition, one must first understand the term in its general sense. MacIntyre et al. defined motivation as an attribute of the individual describing the psychological qualities underlying behavior with respect to a particular task (2001, p. 463). This goal-directed behavior shows itself through distinct actions of the motivated individual. Drnyei described this explicitly when he wrote the following: The motivated individual expends effort, is persistent and attentive to the task at hand, has goals, desires and aspirations, enjoys the activity, experiences reinforcement from success and disappointment from failure, makes attributions concerning success and or failure, is aroused, and makes use of strategies to aid in achieving goals (2003, p. 173). This statement portrays motivation as primarily being internally driven; however, there are also external forces that play a role. Gardner (1996) believed that motivation should

Motivation

be viewed as a hybrid concept, an internal attribute that is the result of an external force (as cited in MacIntyre et al. 2001, p. 463). Although early motivation research addressed human behaviors other than language learning, over the past 45 years, the significance of its role in language acquisition has been realized. Drnyei (2001) wrote, A great deal of empirical research during this period [the 1980s] was directed at measuring the association between various aspects of motivation and L2 language achievement. The emerging body of research studies established motivation as a principal determinant of second language acquisition (p. 43). The research Drnyei is referring to was the work of Gardner, who defined motivation with respect to language acquisition as the combination of effort plus desire to achieve the goal of learning the language plus favorable attitudes toward learning the language (1985, p. 10). Gardner added, Individuals who are truly motivated not only strive to learn the material but also seek out situations where they can obtain further practice (1985, p. 50). The challenge is to examine what drives this motivation. The first area to investigate is the brain and its processes. In recent years, John Schumann has been examining second language acquisition from a neurobiological perspective in order to integrate the findings of neuroscience with those of linguistics (Drnyei 2001, p. 46). Schumanns theory, known as stimulus appraisal, occurs in the brain along five dimensions: novelty, pleasantness, goal/need significance, coping potential and self and social image (Drnyei 2001, p. 46). Though this concept can pertain to any human action, it serves as the foundation for a language learning theory Schumann calls mental foraging, or foraging for knowledge, which engages the same neural systems as the ones used by organisms when foraging to feed or

Motivation

mate, and which is generated by an incentive motive and potentiated by the stimulus appraisal system (Drnyei 2001, pp. 46-47). This notion may seem questionable at first, but it is rooted in proven brain processes. Schumann clarified this when he wrote: Learning and foraging may share the same neural mechanisms because both processes involve translating an incentive motive or goal into relevant motor activity in order to achieve said goal. In addition, both processes are guided by dopamine, which serves to signal stimuli that are predictive of award, to focus attention on those stimuli and to maintain goal-directed behavior by providing go signals. Finally, the dopamine response results from stimulus appraisals that evaluate the stimuli according to whether they are novel, pleasant, and compatible with the individuals goals, coping potential, and self and social image (2001, p. 23). This is clear evidence of motivation being affected by chemical activity in the brain. The most important and well-researched components of internally driven motivation fall under the broad category of self-determination, which includes the concepts of integrative, intrinsic and instrumental motivation. Gardner (1985) wrote, An integrative orientation refers to that class of reasons that suggest that the individual is learning a second language in order to learn about, interact with or become closer to the second language community (p. 54). This fosters a feeling of belongingness to the target language group as the language learner develops some sort of a psychological and emotional identification to the native speaking community (Drnyei 2003, p. 5). Drnyei expanded on this idea nearly 20 years after Gardner when he reported: Integrative motivational orientation concerns a positive interpersonal/affective

Motivation disposition toward the L2 group and the desire to interact with and even become similar to valued members of that community. It implies an openness to, and a respect for, other cultural groups and ways of life (2003, p. 5).

The question is how exactly does this integrative desire promote language learning? As early as 1972, Gardner and Lambert proposed that An integrative and friendly outlook towards the other group whose language is being learnt can differentially sensitize the learner to the audio-lingual features of the language, making him more perceptive to forms of pronunciation and accent (p. 134). Masgoret et al. stated that learning a second language requires the adoption of word sounds, pronunciations, word orders, and other behavioral and cognitive features that are part of another culture. Individuals who want to identify with the other language group will be more motivated to learn the language than individuals who do not (2003, p. 172). This explains why immigrants who arrive in a country against their will because of war or political problems often do not show the same rate of language acquisition as their fellow countrymen who voluntarily left their homeland. However, even in negative situations like incarceration abroad, if the desire to integrate with the surrounding people is strong enough, language acquisition will occur. Second language learners, wrote Stauble, will succeed to the degree that they acculturate to the target language group if no formal instruction is attempted (as cited in Richard-Amato, 1997, p. 63). An example of this is Kay Danes, an English-speaking Australian incarcerated in Vientiane, Laos, who reported that most of her closest friends were Thai, Lao or Hmong speakers with whom she developed a feeling of community and belonging (personal communication, October 10, 2003). Through interactions with

Motivation

members of these target languages, Danes became an integral part of the larger nonEnglish speaking prison population, and subsequently, she learned their languages. This was probably the most important factor aiding her language acquisition. Baker and MacIntyre believed that mastery of a second language involves, to some degree, taking on the identity and culture of the target language (2000, p. 318). Danes felt she reached the point where she was no longer an English-speaking Australian. By the end of the year spent inside Ponthong prison, she stated, I had almost forgotten how to speak English because my mind was undergoing some changes. Basically I think I was losing my national identity (personal communication, Oct. 10, 2003). This seems difficult to comprehend. How could a person who had spent more than 30 years of her life speaking one language claim that within 12 months of being incarcerated, she was not only forgetting her native language, but the cultural identity associated with it as well? According to Gardner, this is a possibility in extreme cases where integrativeness involves complete identification with the community and possibly even withdrawal from ones own group (2001, p. 12). Thorne attributed such behavior to ones belief that the language of the speakers in the environment is considered far more important than the native language for socialization reasons. In reality, the second language begins to replace the first. Simply stated, the languages of the people in Danes surroundings were more important to her than her native language. Apparently, even Danes fellow prisoners were aware of her transformation. She wrote: Actually in the prison, it was quite bizarre. I would sit and listen to the women speaking in Lao and Thai and I could understand the gist of what they were saying even though I couldnt understand all. It became

Motivation uncanny...that they would be talking and I would interject with a comment...like in affirmation...or yeah, and what about this? The women would look at me and pause for a moment and then laugh and say...you turning into Lao people now, Kay (personal communication, Oct. 10, 2003).

This is an extreme case of successful integrative motivation in the real world, but similar accommodations must be made by language learners who are only exposed to target languages in the classroom. The integratively motivated student, wrote Masgoret et al., is one who is motivated to learn the second language, has an openness to identification with the other language community, and has favorable attitudes toward the language situation (2003, p. 174). But classroom students have to embrace the target language on a much deeper level. Gardner and Lambert (1972) wrote: The acquisition of a new language involves much more than mere acquisition of a new set of verbal habits. The language student must be willing to adopt appropriate features of behavior, which characterize members of another linguistic community. The words, grammatical patterns, mode of pronunciation, and the sounds themselves should have a significance for the learner that goes beyond simple translations or equivalences given by a teacher, grammar book, or dictionary (p. 14). Various research studies have supported these views. Archibald and Libben (1995) reported, Gardner and Lambert (1959) studied English speakers learning French in Quebec and argued that integrative motivation led to greater success in second language

Motivation

learning (p. 318). Bialystok and Hakuta (1994) attributed the success of these English speakers to their interest in the French language and culture and the desire to become part of the community (p. 137). Gardner and Lamberts early research on English speaking students learning French in 1960 Connecticut determined the strong motivation to learn French seems to stem from the students integrative orientations towards the study of the language (1972, p. 36). Later studies by Gardner, Lalonde and Moorcroft (1985) revealed that using an English/French paired associates language paradigm, the rate of learning French nouns was faster for students with favorable attitudes and motivation as compared with those with less favorable ones (as cited in Gardner and MacIntyre, 1995, p. 209). Gardner also reported that Native Americans learning English demonstrated integrative motivation when they reported viewing learning English as valuable in order to become truly part of the American culture (1985, p. 50). Additional support comes from Meara and Skehan (1989) who presented several studies relating motivational characteristics to classroom behavior and acquisitional processes (p. 57). Meara and Skehan also cited research by Glicksman (1976) that showed
that students classified as having integrative orientations to language study volunteered

more frequently in class, gave more correct answers, and received more positive reinforcement (1989, p. 57). Meara and Skehan also wrote, A specifically integrative motive was involved in a study by Kaplan and Shand (1984) who argue that such an orientation is related to systematic patterns of error detection, which could well have implications for error correction and subsequent language development (1989, p. 57). Skehan also wrote, An integrative orientation is associated with an elaborative simplification strategy, i.e. hypothesis formation about the target language and a

Motivation

willingness to restructure the linguistic system. Meisel (1980) proposes that this strategy is associated with greater progress (1989, p. 58). Clearly, integrative motivation plays as significant a role in the language-learning classroom as it does in the real world. Gardner and Lambert (1972) supported this when they wrote: We find that an integrative and friendly outlook toward the other group whose language is being learned can differentially synthesize the learner to the audiolingual features of the language, making him more perceptive to form of pronunciation and accent (p. 134). Understandably, it helps if the student is learning the target language in that environment as opposed to only in the classroom. Instrumental motivation is the next major type of self-determined motivation. Gardner wrote that persons who acquire languages through instrumental motivation are seeking a goal that doesnt seem to involve any identification or feeling of closeness with the other language group, but instead focus on a more practical purpose [that] learning the language would serve for the individual (2001, p. 10). Such motivation could be considered by some to be learning a target language simply to get ahead in society. Gardner and Lambert wrote, a person prepares to learn a code in order to derive benefits from a non-interpersonal sort and their language skills develop as a desire to gain social recognition or economic advantages through knowledge of a foreign language (1972, p. 14). A clear example of such a case is Armando Rodriguez, a Mexican-born immigrant who has lived in Los Angeles, California, for the past 20 years. Rodriguez, a native Spanish-speaker, did not pick-up English in the U.S. as would be expected.

Motivation 10 Surprisingly, he became fluent in Hebrew. Silverstein (1999), who interviewed Rodriguez, reported, After getting a job as a restaurant dishwasher and kitchen assistant, Rodriguez quickly absorbed new words and expressions by chatting with coworkers and customers. He picked up so much [Hebrew] that he never needed to enroll in a formal language class (p. 1). One would assume that Rodriguezs Hebrew is rudimentary at best; however, his boss, Felix Wizgan, claimed, He [Rodriguez] speaks Hebrew like an Israeli (Silverstein, 1999, p. 1). Silverstein, who is not a linguist, psychologist or educator, credited Armandos financial needs as the force driving his language success when he stated, Picking up a few words in a foreign language, or in exceptional cases, advanced conversational skills, sometimes is a way to get ahead economically. Rodriguez, for instance, worked his way up from dishwasher to manager because he became fluent in Hebrew (1999, p. 1). This may have played a motivational role by encouraging Rodriguez to remain gainfully employed by continuously practicing and thus improving his Hebrew, but it can hardly be considered the sole cause for his acquisition of Hebrew. Another case of economically driven language learning is that of Miriam Wenger, a Polish woman of the Jewish faith who was 17 when the Russian army liberated her small town in eastern Poland from the Germans in 1944. To make money to survive, her mother would bake cakes and bread and send Miriam into the streets to sell the food to the Russian soldiers from 6 a.m. until evening. Miriam stated, It only took me seven months to become very good at speaking Russian. When you deal with soldiers all day every day selling and arguing, you learn fast (personal communication, October 31, 2003). Miriam realized that learning to communicate in Russian would have positive

Motivation 11 effects on her life. Norris-Holt described Miriams experience perfectly when she wrote, Instrumental motivation underlies the goal to gain some social or economic reward through L2 achievement, thus referring to a more functional reason for language learning (2001, p. 1). Gardner and Lambert described Miriams behavior when they wrote that instrumentally motivated individuals are interested mainly in using the cultural group and their language as an instrument of personal satisfaction, with few signs of an interest in the other people per se (1972, p. 15). Such motivation would be exaggerated in situations where ones survival is the ultimate goal. For Kay Danes, the target language was the key to survival. It was important for her to learn Lao not only for her own welfare, but also for those with whom she lived. Danes wrote: If you wanted to survive, or to be understood, you had to submerge yourself fully into the culture and language or you would never understand fully what was expected of you, how to follow the regulations...how to negotiate with the guards in order to attempt to build a rapport so that they would not look on you so dishonorably, how to shout out to the police at night when another prisoner was dying. (personal communication, Oct. 10, 2003) Learning another language in prison ensured the ultimate goal, extending human life. Drnyei believed actions in such situations are carried out to achieve some instrumental end, such as earning a reward or avoiding a punishment (2003, p. 39) Warren Fellows, an Australian jailed in Thailand concurred with the notion of the importance of learning the target language to be accepted in order to make it through each day. He wrote, To

Motivation 12 win the trust and respect of the Thai prisoners, I had to learn their language as best I could (1998, p. 76). In both cases, the desire to survive provided the motivation needed to learn a new language. This is further supported by Baker and MacIntyres belief that motivation is the driving force that initiates learning in the first place and sustains learning when the situation becomes difficult (2000, p. 317). Danes and Fellows success at language learning in such a harsh environment can be attributed by Khanna and Agnihotri (1984) to the idea that in settings where there is an urgency about mastering a second language for utilitarian ends, it is the instrumental motivation which is more effective (p. 80). These two situations clearly support this assumption. Instrumental motivation has also been found to play an important role in the classroom. Gardner and MacIntyre (1995) wrote, Instrumentally motivated students studied longer than non-instrumentally motivated students when there was an opportunity to profit from learning (p. 207). This behavior also occurs in the foreign language classroom. Sawhney (1998) examined the effects of instrumental motivation on university students learning German in India. She reported the following: Reasons such as getting a good job, doing international business, reading novels, interacting with Germans and making good friends with them indicate that the students were basically interested in learning German for economic gain, prestige and social recognition (1998, p. 128). Gardner and Lamberts early studies in Quebec revealed successful learning of French by English speaking students who focused on obtaining language credit and getting job promotions (Bialystok and Hakuta 1994, p. 137). Gardners research on Native American students revealed an instrumental orientation, which referred to the economic and

Motivation 13 practical advantages of learning English (1985, p. 51). In a study by Garner and Lambert (1972) of Tagolog speaking Philippinos, it was found that students who approach the study of English with an instrumental outlook are clearly more successful in developing proficiency in the language than are those who fail to adopt this orientation (p. 130). These students realized the importance of English in their lives. Gardner and Lambert added, Apparently, when there is a vital need to master a second language, the instrumental approach is very effective (1972, p. 130). Other studies were conducted more recently in Hungary. Drnyei and Clment (2001) examined nearly 5,000 Hungarian teenage boys and girls, ages 13 and 14, using an attitude/motivation survey to determine what encourages them to study any of five particular languages: English (British or American), German, Russian, French or Italian. Traditionally, English and German have been associated with financial success, Russian with occupation, French with aristocracy, and Italian with summer vacation (Drnyei and Clment 2001, p. 402). The results were quite surprising. Factors associated with the pragmatic, instrumental values of knowing a world language placed Russian in first place by far, based on the teenagers affinity towards Russian pop music, magazines, TV programs and films (Drnyei and Clment 2001, p. 407-408) which certainly does not encourage the need for formal classroom foreign language instruction. The results concerning feelings of integrativeness were even more interesting. Drnyei and Clment described these students as having a general positive outlook on the L2 and its culture, to the extent that learners scoring high on this factor would like to become similar to the L2 speakers (2001, p. 409). In this case, English, particularly American English, greatly surpassed all the other languages. The top three factors were the Hungarians attraction to

Motivation 14 Americans, their desires to be like Americans, and their wishes to travel to the United States (Drnyei and Clment, 2001, p. 408). Unfortunately, this study has some major flaws. First of all, the maturity level of the subjects is questionable. Perhaps older students should be surveyed, or the same students questioned as part of a longitudinal study as they age. A more pressing concern is that the survey appears to be more of a measure of attitude towards different foreign languages, not motivation to learn them. Additionally, the authors failed to mention the students present level of foreign language competence or success in the foreign language classroom. Considering the amount of time spent on conducting this research, it would appear that the researchers neglected to examine all the resourceful data that was created. Intrinsic motivation is the last significant variety of self-determined motivation that this paper will address. It is defined by Deci and Ryan as being related to basic human needs for competence, autonomy and relatedness. Intrinsic motivation activities are those that the learner engages in for their own sake because of their value, interest and challenge (as cited in Walqui 2000, p. 4). Dornyei expanded on this to include motivation to engage in an activity because that activity is enjoyable and satisfying to do (2003, p. 38). Such behavior appears to be very important in the language classroom. Noels (2001) wrote, Intrinsic orientations refer to reasons for L2 learning that are derived from ones inherent pleasure and interest in the activityand the spontaneous satisfaction that is associated with it (p. 45). Basically, the more one enjoys learning the target language, the more successful they are at it, and the better they feel about the task. Deci and Ryan (1985) supported this when they wrote, Being intrinsically motivated to learn improves the quality of learning and that those conditions that are autonomy

Motivation 15 supporting and informational will promote more effective learning as well as enhanced intrinsic motivation and self-esteem (p. 256). As much as internal feelings and desires drive language acquisition, they only account for part of the motivational scenario. According to Drnyei (2003), there are sociocultural roots of learning and cognition in general that stem from the sociocultural environment rather than from the individual (p. 45). The present challenge is that applied linguists need to understand better how the social contexts surrounding language acquisition affect the learning process (Drnyei 2003, p. 45). This portion of the paper will explore motivation from a socio-educational perspective. Gardners socio-educational model, wrote MacIntyre et al. (2001. p. 462), proposes that motivation is based in large part on inter-group attitudes and attraction to the target language and culture. Gardner himself proposed that the acquisition of a second language is a true social psychological phenomenon in that it is concerned with the development of communication skills between an individual and members of another cultural community (Gardner and Tremblay 1998, p. 31). According to Gardner (1985), motivation is a central concept of the socio-educational model, and it has a social dimension that reflects the individuals reactions to other language communities (p. 168). That is, motivation to learn a second language is influenced by group related and context related attitudes (Gardner 1985, p. 168). But people have to mentally and physically engage themselves in the target language and culture to be successful language learners. Regarding work by Clment in the 1980s, Noels stated, In his socio-contextual model of L2 motivation, he maintains that the quality and frequency of contact with members of the L2 group will influence self-confidence, motivation, and ultimately language

Motivation 16 proficiency (p. 57). Unfortunately, this is something supporters of bilingual education [how it is presented in much of the United States] have yet to realize. Drnyei (2003) wrote, While an L2 is a learnable school subject in that discreet elements of the communication code can be taught explicitly, it is also socially and culturally bound, which makes language learning a deeply social event that requires a wide range of elements of the L2 culture (p. 4). Who is better than a target language speaking classroom instructor to provide this service, especially with respect to foreign language learning? Since language serves the social function of establishing and maintaining communication between individuals, it could explain how people come to learn new languages (Bialystok and Hakuta 1994, p. 134). Forcing people to use a target language may be one of the best ways to aid them in target language acquisition. Though somewhat harsh, Gardner and Lambert (1972) stated, It seems that when the social setting demands it, people master a second language no matter what (p. 2). To demonstrate how powerful motivation can be, it is prudent to introduce situations in which motivation was so strong that language learning occurred when it was not to be expected. Meara and Skehan (1989) wrote, Corders phrase, Given motivation, anyone can learn a language brings out the importance of motivation and the way it can overcome unfavourable circumstances (p. 49). Such a case involved a schizophrenic named Louis Wolfson who hated and feared his mother. In particular, wrote Gass and Selinker (2001), he hated his mothers voice and hence, her native language, American English. To escape this pain, he learned other languages, primarily Hebrew, German, Russian and French (the language in which he wrote his story) (p.

Motivation 17 352). Silverstein reported the following story about an African-American miner who became fluent in Serbian:
Publisher William Jovanovich, in his 1998 biography, tells of how as a young boy he was surprised to see his Tata [Papa] launch into a conversation in Serbian with an elderly black man in Denver. Jovanovichs Tata explained that the black man had worked with us Montenegrins in a coal mine...and nobody spoke English. He learned our language in self-defense (1999, p. 1).

In the first case, mental instability and hatred encouraged language learning, and in the second, it was a threatening work environment. More research in the area of language acquisition under duress needs to be executed. With so many studies indicating the importance of motivation in language learning, what is being done in a pedagogical sense? Unfortunately, not enough. As early as 1972, Gardner and Lambert recognized the approach needed for instructors dealing with students in the US: The message for teachers and directors of language programs is clear; in North American settings, students of foreign languages will profit more if they can be helped to develop an integrative outlook toward the group whose language is being studied (p. 130). This would mean for a student to experience an integrative feeling in school, stepping through the classroom door should be like stepping off an airplane into the target language community. I have seen this done in a high school Spanish class, and the students positively commented that they felt like they were in a foreign country every day for an hour. The walls were covered with posters from Spain, the teacher played Spanish music, there were Spanish magazines and CDs available, and only Spanish was spoken. Though no one evaluated the students success at acquiring Spanish, this particular class was always full and highly recommended to other students.

Motivation 18 Surprisingly, Gardner and Lambert had the foresight to recognize that when it came to learning English as the target language, the classroom approach should be different. They wrote the following:
For members of ethnic minority groups in North America or citizens in developing nations where imported foreign languages become one of the national languages, the story is different. Learning a second language with national and worldwide recognition is for them of vital importance, and both instrumental and integrative approaches to the learning task must be developed (1972, p. 130).

If one looks at foreign language education on a global level, it would appear that most nations have adopted this style of instruction. I believe this to be the case simply based on the number of international students studying successfully in America, Canada, England and Australia, as well as the plentiful number of English speaking persons I have encountered in my numerous international travels. Gardner and Lambert did mention the following precaution: The fascinating challenge for these groups, however, is to keep their own cultural and linguistic identity while mastering the second language. What has been most encouraging to us throughout these investigations is the fact that one can with the proper attitudinal orientation and motivation become bilingual without losing ones identity (1972, p. 130). This author feels such a policy has gone too far, especially with respect to heritage language learning. It is unfortunate that my family lost its French and Italian heritage languages in one generation due to the common US education policy of one nation, one language. However, it is a greater travesty to be instructing students in Spanish in American schools to the extent that they cannot pass English proficiency exams at the

Motivation 19 high school level, even though they were born in the US. I believe such policies to be anti-motivational with respect to learning English. School systems have yet to develop a balanced dual-language instructional system. This is unfortunate, as the benefits of such a system would likely promote overall success in acquiring both languages. In fact, wrote Gardner and Lambert, striving for a comfortable place in two cultures seems to be the best motivational basis for becoming bilingual (1972, p. 130). Years later, Gardner (1985) de-emphasized the teachers role and placed more emphasis on the student when he stated, Motivation is a total state of the individual, not just a simple interest in the language nor a drive to learn some specific material because of some environmental pressure such as an examination or a desire to please a teacher or parent. More recently, Gardner and Tremblay have identified what they label the educational shift and motivational renaissance of the 1990s (as cited in Drnyei 2003, p. 11). Drnyei (2003) explained what he meant as follows:
The key assumption that energized this boom in research was that the classroom environment - and more generally, the contextual surroundings of action had a much stronger motivational influence than had been proposed before. Researchers therefore started to examine the motivational impact of the various aspects of the learning context, for example, course-specific motivational components (e.g. relevance of the teaching materials, interest in the tasks, appropriateness of the teaching method), teacher-specific motivational components, (the motivational impact of the teachers personality, behavior, and teaching style practice), and group specific motivational components (various characteristics of the learner group such as cohesiveness, goal-orientedness and group norms (p. 11).

Motivation 20 At first this may seem advantageous, but from a research perspective, it opens up the proverbial can of worms. Now there are even more factors affecting motivation, many of them external, which the classroom language learner has little or no control over. With Drnyeis implications, an already complex issue has just become much more involved. Even before Drnyeis comment complicated matters, there were many critics of motivation. Jakobovits (1970) reported, Dunkel found in a 1948 report that monetary rewards did not significantly improve performance in an artificial language learning task (p. 243). However, it is possible that the money was not interfering with the subjects success at learning, but instead it was the artificial language that was the problem. Learning such a language would have little if any impact on ones daily life, so as long as they were getting paid, what difference would it make? Caroll believed that as long as learners remain cooperative and actively engage in learning whether they want to or not, motivational differences will not make much difference in achievement (as cited in Jakobovits (1970, p. 243). Gardner and Lambert themselves mentioned the challenges of researching the motivational aspects of second language achievement when they commented on the inherent difficulty in conceptualizing and measuring those motivational variables that would likely determine success in second language acquisition (1972, p. 11-12). Gardners socio-educational model was heavily criticized in the mid 1990s by a number of respected researchers, including Drnyei, Oxford, Shearin, Crookes & Schmidt who argued that motivation should be studied from different perspectives (MacIntyre et al. 2001, p. 464). These authors, wrote MacIntyre et al. (2001) claimed that Gardners theory put too much emphasis on the integrative and instrumental

Motivation 21 distinction and tended to ignore a list of variables from the broad psychological literature in motivation, including extrinsic rewards, self-efficacy, expectancy, attributions, locus of control and so on (p. 464). Bialystok and Hakuta (1994) agreed, stating that the learners in the Gardner and Lambert language studies were never exclusively motivated by instrumental or integrative orientation (p. 139). Instead, they attributed the motivation to a combination of both orientations that was dependant on the individual. Bialystok and Hakuta (1994) did concede that although motivational factors probably do not make much difference on their own, they can create a more positive context in which language learning is likely to flourish (p. 140). Many criticisms have been based on empirical studies. McGraw (1978) reviewed several studies in which in most instances, rewards impaired learning (as cited in Deci & Ryan, 1985, p. 257). Providing extrinsic rewards such as money for learning words or for forming concepts, wrote Deci & Ryan, seems to have distracted subjects from the learning task and increased the time necessary for learning or problem solving. When extrinsic rewards are introduced into a learning situation, some of the learners attention appears to shift from the learning task to the reward (p. 257). Deci & Ryan also discussed a translation study in Japan by Inagaki and Hatano (1984), which determined the mere expectation of evaluations impaired students comprehension of material that they were translating from English into Japanese. Thus, it appears that any external condition that decreases intrinsic motivation will also impair performance on conceptual activities (p. 257). Meara and Skehan presented research by Oller and his associates, which showed negative relationships between integrativeness and language proficiency. Various studies

Motivation 22 examined Chinese, Japanese and Spanish speaking individuals and produced the following results:
A negative correlation between Chinese university students desire to stay in the US and their English proficiency; a negative association between Japanese students proficiency in English and their ratings of English speakers as confident and modest; a negative relationship between English proficiency and ratings of Anglos for a group of Mexican-American women (Meara & Skehan 1989, p. 68).

Considering the complexity of motivation, it is possible that these studies did not examine enough of the other possible causes for these findings, therefore producing atypical results. Lastly, there is some controversy concerning whether or not it is motivation that drives language learning success, or does successful language learning influence motivation. Meara and Skehan label this problem as the direction of causation (1989, p. 148). If this were the case, it would seriously undermine all of the findings proposed by Gardner, as motivation would then become an effect, not a cause. The only way to solidify the positive role motivation plays in language learning is to conduct more studies. Meara and Skehan acknowledged the dearth of research in the field and wrote there is value in widening the social situation in which the role of motivation for language learning is studied (1989, p. 69). It would be pertinent to conduct studies like Gardner and Lamberts 1960s French target language learning by English speakers in Quebec, Louisiana and Connecticut across many languages today. Meara and Skehan (1989) suggested the following: One could research with other minority groups in other countries, some indigenous, some immigrant, some who retain ethnolinguistic

Motivation 23 vitality and others not. One could also look at refugee groups, comparing those intending to stay in the host country as well as those intending to move on (p. 69). Factors such as age, language setting (foreign or domestic), language status relationships, and methods of data collection could be altered and examined to see what effects they have on motivation. It would be beneficial to do a follow-up on Drnyei and Clments teen language motivation study in Hungary, perhaps even turning it into a longitudinal study to see how motivation changes as the subjects mature. In Miami, it would be interesting to study the apparently low levels of motivation with respect to learning English of Spanish speaking immigrants, and contrast this to the highly motivated Brazilian, Haitian and Russian populations living in there who often learn both English and Spanish. The research possibilities are endless. The Spanish language classrooms in South Texas, Southern Arizona and New Mexico, where American-born monolingual English speakers are learning Spanish, now the dominant language of said areas, would serve as an excellent laboratory. Would the English speakers be motivated enough to learn a language that has been forced upon them, especially since failure to learn Spanish limits their job marketability? Of course, there are more positive situations to explore. In Switzerland, for example, people have been peacefully coexisting with five languages: French, German, Swiss-German, Italian and Romansh for centuries. The Swiss are the first to admit that having so many languages in such a small country can be challenging, and there are sometimes ill feelings between the language groups. Today, however, instead of German or French competing against one another for the number one language position, they are competing together against English. This has to be affecting Swiss

Motivation 24 pride. Someone should be studying motivation to learn English across Switzerland and its language groups, especially among those in the work force, universities, and K-12, whose lives are and will be most affected by the consolidation of Europes economies and the obvious importance of the English language as the unifying factor on the European continent. There are so many reasons motivating individuals to learn other languages that perhaps no one cause or type of motivation can possibly serve as the sole foundation of language acquisition. After reading numerous books and articles searching for one outstanding, concrete solution, perhaps the words of Noels provide the best advice. She offered that in addition to the major players of integrative and instrumental motivation in language acquisition, people may wish to learn an L2 for many number of reasons, including intellectual stimulation, showing off to friends, a need for achievement and stimulation, interest, curiosity, a desire for assimilation, travel, friendship, knowledge, prestige, career, school, media, national security or any combination of these (Noels 2001, p. 44). It is plain to see that many of these involve overlapping integrative, instrumental, intrinsic and social motivations. Gardner and Lambert (1972) concurred with this idea when they stated, each setting and each ethnolinguistic group has its own fascinating pattern of socio-psychological influences that change in unexpected ways the manner in which attitudes and motivation play their roles (p. 121). There is much work to be done before researchers, teachers and language learners will fully understand motivation and all its aspects. In the words of Drnyei, L2 motivation as a situated construct will undoubtedly be one of the main targets of future motivation research (2003, p. 45), which is something I plan to be very much a part of.

Motivation 25 References Archibald, J. & Libben, G. (1995). Research perspectives on second language acquisition. Ontario, Canada: Copp Clark Ltd. Baker, S. C. & MacIntyre, P. D. (2000, June). The role of gender and immersion in communication and second language orientations. Language Learning, 50:2, 311341. Bialystok, E. & Hakuta, K. (1994). In other words: The science and psychology of second Language acquisition. New York: Basic Books, A division of HarperCollins Publishers, Inc. Deci, E.L. & Ryan, R.M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. New York: Plenum Press. Dornyei, Z. (2001). New themes & approaches in second language motivation research. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 21, 43-59. Drnyei, Z. (2003) Attitudes, orientations, and motivations in language learning. Malden, Mass: Blackwell Publishing. Drnyei, Z., & Clment, R. ((2001). Motivational characteristics of learning different target languages: Results of a nationwide survey. In Z. Dornyei & R. Schmidt (Eds.), Motivation and second language acquisition (Technical Report #23, pp. 399-432). Honolulu: University of Hawaii, Second Language Teaching and Curriculum Center. Fellows, W. (1998). 4,000 days: My life in a Bangkok prison. New York: St. Martins Press. Gardner, R. C. (1985). Social psychology and second language learning: The role of attitudes and motivation. Baltimore, MD: Edward Arnold. Gardner, R. C. (2001). Integrative Motivation: Past, Present & Future. A paper presented At the Distinguished Lecturer Series, Temple University Japan, Tokyo, February 17, 2001; Retrieved October 30, 2003, from http://publish.uwo.ca/~gardner/ GardnerPublic Lecture1.pdf Gardner, R. C. & Lambert, W. (1972). Attitudes and motivation in second language learning. Rowley, Mass: Newbury House Publishers, Inc. Gardner, R. C. & MacIntyre, P. (1995). An instrumental motivation study: Who says it isnt effective? In H. Brown & S. Gonzo (Eds.), Readings on second language acquisition (pp. 207-224). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall Regents.

Motivation 26 Gardner, R. C. & Tremblay, P. T. (1998). Specificity of affective variables and the trait/state conceptualization of motivation in second language acquisition. In R. K. Agnihotri et al. (Eds.), Social psychological perspectives on second language learning. (pp. 31-52). New Delhi: SAGE Publications.

Gass, S. & Selinker, L. (2001). Second language acquisition: An introductory course. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. Jakobovits, L.A. (1970). Foreign language learning: A psycholinguistic analysis of the issues. Rowley, Mass: Newbury House Publishers. Khanna, A. L. & Agnihotri, R. K. (1998). Some predictors of speech skills: A sociopsychological study. In R. K. Agnihotri et al. (Eds.), Social psychological perspectives on second language learning. (pp. 79-98). New Delhi: SAGE Publications. MacIntyre, P. D., MacMaster, K., & Baker, S. C. (2001). The convergence of multiple models of motivation for second language learning: Gardner, Pintrich, Kuhl, and McCroskey. In Z. Dornyei & R. Schmidt (Eds.), Motivation and second language acquisition (Technical Report #23, pp. 461-492). Honolulu: University of Hawaii, Second Language Teaching and Curriculum Center. Masgoret, A-M., Bernaus, M., & Gardner, R. C. (2001). Examining the role of attitudes and motivation outside of the formal classroom: A test of the mini-AMTB for children. In Z. Dornyei & R. Schmidt (Eds.), Motivation and second language acquisition (Technical Report #23, pp. 281-295). Honolulu: University of Hawaii, Second Language Teaching and Curriculum Center. Meara, P. & Skehan, P. (1989). Individual differences in second language learning. London: Edward Arnold. Noels, K. (2001). New orientations in language learning motivation: Towards a model of intrinsic, extrinsic, and integrative orientations and motivation. In Z. Dornyei & R. Schmidt (Eds.), Motivation and second language acquisition (Technical Report #23, pp. 43-68). Honolulu: University of Hawaii, Second Language Teaching and Curriculum Center. Norris-Holt, J. (2001). Motivation as a contributing factor in second language acquisition [Electronic Version]. The Internet TESOL Journal. Vol VII, No. 6. Retrieved October 31, 2003, from http:/iteslj.org/Articles/Norris-Motivational.html Richard-Amato, P. (1997). Affect and related factors. Alexandria, Virginia: Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages, Inc.

Motivation 27 Sawhney, C. (1998). The role of attitudes and motivation in foreign language learning: The case of German in India. In R. K. Agnihotri et al. (Eds.), Social psychological perspectives on second language learning. (pp. 119-129). New Delhi: SAGE Publications. Schumann, J. H. (2001). Learning as foraging. In Z. Dornyei & R. Schmidt (Eds.), Motivation and second language acquisition (Technical Report #23, pp. 21-28). Honolulu: University of Hawaii, Second Language Teaching and Curriculum Center. Silverstein, S. (1999, December 8). Crossing language barriers. The Los Angeles Times. Retrieved October 1, 2003, from www.latimes.com. Walqui, A. (2000, September). Contextual factors in second language acquisition (pp. 15). Retrieved September 30, 2003, from ERIC Clearinghouse on Languages and Linguistics database (EDO-FL-00-05).