Motivation to Learn a Foreign Language

Similar to the framework defined by Brophy (2004), intrinsic foreign language motivation in Japan may likewise be characterized by differing levels and orientations (Nakata, 2006).

These differing levels, a surface level state-like motivation and a deeper trait-like level of motivation, may be characterized by differing degrees of autonomous engagement with the foreign language. Noting these different levels and how they were reached among adult learners, with some moving from the surface to deeper levels of intrinsic desire to learn, two features are clear within this framework of intrinsic motivation: 1) The internalization of different intrinsic desires to learn a foreign language come from experiences in which our behavior is mediated through others, as noted by Brophy (2004, p. 259); and 2) These desires indicate a shift in the perceived value of the activity from an external or environmental precursor to an internal one, another idea compatible with the SDT position on integrated regulation (Ryan & Deci, 2002) and the process of integrative functioning (Weinstein et al., 2013).

Motivation to learn and the process of providing students with motivation can be understood within the framework of self-determination theory as moving students away from amotivation and extrinsic regulation towards more autonomous forms of motivation, just as in SDT (Brophy, 2004; Reeve, 2002). According to this framework, students’ identified regulation for school learning can be built by through fresh experiences that appeal to the values, relevance, reasons, and deeper needs of the individual. Above and beyond the idea of autonomy and providing students with the opportunity for initiative, students also need

teachers who will give them good reasons and understanding of the importance of their learning (Brophy, 2008; 2009). Within the motivation to learn framework emphasized by Brophy (2004) and Stipek (2002), teachers need to show students that what they learn is useful and valuable to them as people in order to help students independently and willingly engage with the material.

This then is compatible with the research in self-determination theory, wherein providing reasons and a clear framework for action has motivating effects for students (Assor, Kaplan, & Roth, 2002; Katz & Assor, 2006; Reeve & Halusic, 2009; Reeve & Tseng, 2011; Reeve, Jang, Hardre, & Omura, 2002). These results are often quite broadly framed within the topic of autonomy but perhaps more accurately titled relevance and connected with other theories involving achievement. Indeed, one study conducted by Assor and colleagues (2002) found that for students in elementary school grades, the strongest predictor of positive affect for the subject matter and behavioral and cognitive engagement was the idea of fostering relevance for the subject matter.

As discussed above, SDT offers a broad framework for the interpretation of motivation. The myriad other motivational theories offer a clear foundation for the interpretation of the phenomenon that they were designed to address, from how students perceive foreign cultures to their expectations of task success. Most specifically, language learning motivation theories often work from the basic assumption that language, as a basic tool of cognitive functioning, are fundamentally different from other subjects and other learning, and therefore require their own theories of motivation as well.

This assumption is problematic at a very basic level. While it correctly addresses the notion that languages are used as tools designating group insiders and outsiders (Kachru, 1998), the idea that other subjects do not carry with it the capacity to define group members,

is inherently flawed. Many bodies of knowledge have their own dedicated communities with gatekeeper practices to exclude non-members (Wenger, 1998). Likewise, members of a professional community may be fundamentally changed by membership in that group, and may find it difficult to return to their former social groups. An example would be a child who grows up on a farm but studies to become a doctor in the city. She may be able to use her knowledge to benefit her former community, but her work and changes in social environment may just as easily make her an outsider there as much as her farm background make her an outsider among the community of wealthy physicians.

Likewise, some evidence exists for the idea of differences in subject matter proficiency, but the origins of this are similarly murky. There is strong evidence for a difference between self-concept for mathematics and one’s own language (Marsh, 1986), though this finding also shows that achievement in mathematics and language are highly correlated. This aligns with empirical evidence that language ability is significantly related to mathematics (Aiken, 1978) and the theory that both are regulated by underlying deep mental processing (Pinker, 1995). It is very rare to find an individual who is skilled at one but completely lacks any ability in any other–exceedingly few people complete school with the ability to solve complex equations but no ability to write a paragraph, and students who are able to converse in a foreign language likely have mastered most essential mathematical skills. More recent studies show that mathematics, own language, and foreign language achievement are also highly correlated (all > .6, Xu et al., 2013).

Further, ability in one’s own language relates to ability in a foreign language (Skehan, 1990). More recent research has shown a strong genetic component to both reading and mathematical ability (Davis et al., 2014), indicating that if own language ability is predictive of second language acquisition, to some extent mathematical ability is as well. As both first

and second language acquisition may be broadly modeled on a number of basic cognitive abilities broadly related to IQ (Carroll, 1981; Vulchanova et al., 2014; Frost, Siegelman, Narkiss, & Afek, 2013), much of the argument for cognitive differences between foreign language motivation and learning motivation cannot stand. Recognizing then that language as a cognitive process differs little from other subjects, the rational decision must be to use the broadest framework with the greatest explanatory power and ability to integrate new theoretical elements. Considered in addition to the fact that many of the theories retrace extremely similar ground, attempting to formulate a new theoretical foundation for how language motivation works within a specific context appears needless. Further, it lacks a sense of parsimony, and may create excess confusion for practitioners attempting to apply theory.

Finally, language learners in schools are first and foremost students in the classroom environment, and language learners solely by dint of their enrollment in the school system.

There is significant evidence for a general sense of self-concept related to academic ability (Marsh et al., 2014). While school-based domain specific motivations exist and develop early (Guay et al., 2010), these motivations are framed within the larger concept of academic motivation and self-concept (Carreira, 2011; Marsh & Martin, 2011). While building positive self-directed learning orientations and an international mindset are important for lifelong motivation and achievement (Fryer, Ginns, & Walker, 2014; Yashima, Zenuk-Nishide, &

Shimizu, 2004), these factors must also be recognized along with the more proximal and perhaps more salient features of satisfying or thwarting experiences provided by the classroom experience. Thus, while recognizing that foreign-language domain specific affect, interests, and ability perceptions exist, they must also be considered as somewhat inseparable from the general sense of academic ability that develops as children spend time in schools.

While grand theories have indeed shown strong ability to interpret phenomena, the stronger walls between many of the major theories and their proponents are slowly eroding (cf. Wang & Eccles, 2013). As this paradigm shifts as well, theories of motivation, foreign language, education, and learning will hopefully gradually move towards empirical consensus and integration. Thus, for the time, self-determination theory offers the greatest internal consistency and least necessity for additional moving parts to explain motivation.