2 The traditional approach: AMTB & motivational quantity (8.1) Motivation narrowly defined (Gardner)Effort (Motivational intensity)Enjoyment (L2 learning attitudes)Investment (Desire to learn L2)Quantity measured by Likert scales“Truly motivated individual” high in all 3Unlike Kaplan, Watson lacks enjoyment
3 Integrativeness as an antecedent of motivation (8.2) Favorable attitudes toward L2 NSsGeneral interest in FLs (+ low ethnocentrism?)Integrative orientationIntegrative motivation (subsystem) =Integrativeness is highMOT (quantity) is high
5 Additional orientations Among Anglophone CanadiansDominance/recognitionPragmatic controlFamiliarity/involvementSociocultural/belletristic(Clément & Kruidenier)
6 Attitudes Come from collective values, beliefs Based on cultural reward, modelingSpecific to sociocultural milieuHS attitudes U MOT, integrativeness(Indirectly) U attitudes toward BiL, perceived communicative competenceAttitudes, experiences MOT (Gardner)
7 First signs of renewal (8 First signs of renewal (8.4): Self-determination theory & intrinsic motivationTypes of regulation of behaviorInternal (intrinsic MOT)StimulationSelf-accomplishmentKnowledgeIdentified (positive self-image)Introjected (guilt/shame)External (extrinsic MOT)
8 8.5 Motivation from a distance: EFL learners’ orientations & attitudes Orientations in Hungary (Clément et al.)friendship/knowledge xenophilicinstrumental/knowledgeL2 media/indirect contact/cultural interestAttitudes in Japan: International Posture (Yashima)Interest in int’l vocation/activitiesIntercultural approach tendencyInterest in foreign affairs
9 8.6 Language learning motivation: Possible in situations of conflict? Israeli L2 learners (Donitsa-Schmidt et al.)Early starters of L3 ArabicMore culture/peace/instrumental beliefsJHS learners of Arabic vs. other L3sMore MOT/+ attitudes toward L3, speakersChoice of L3 made no differenceBoth groups: teachers, instruction impt.
10 8.7 Dynamic motivation: Time, context, behavior Process model of MOT (Dörnyei & Ottó)MOT develops, changes over timeCausal vs. teleological MOT thinking (Ushioda)Experience-based vs. Goal-orientedMicro-context, task (Dörnyei)Integrativeness & + course attitude + task attitude L2 output+ peer attitudes also help for – task attitudeNew focus on behavior (Csizér & Dörnyei)e.g. language choice, intended effort
11 8.8 Looking forward: L2 motivational self system ComponentsIdeal L2 self (e.g. nativelike speaker)Ought-to L2 Self (e.g. mustn’t fail exam)L2 learning experience (past/present)ProcessInstrumentality + Attitudes to L2 group Ideal L2 Self (new Integrativeness)
12 8.9 Behold the power of motivation Gardner’s research:MOT predicts 9-16% of achievementDörnyei’s new research:MOT predicts 35% of behavior (?)Caution: MOT/L2 success relationship is reciprocal rather than causal
Your consent to our cookies if you continue to use this website.