the relationship between learner autonomy and learner motivation perceived by first year english majors at nguyen tat thanh university

MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND TRAINING HO CHI MINH CITY OPEN UNIVERSITY THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN LEARNER AUTONOMY AND LEARNER MOTIVATION PERCEIVED BY FIRST- YEAR ENGLISH MAJORS AT NGUYEN TA

MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND TRAINING

HO CHI MINH CITY OPEN UNIVERSITY

THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN LEARNER AUTONOMY AND LEARNER MOTIVATION PERCEIVED BY FIRST- YEAR ENGLISH MAJORS AT NGUYEN TAT THANH

UNIVERSITY

A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for

the degree of Master of Arts in TESOL

MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND TRAINING

HO CHI MINH CITY OPEN UNIVERSITY

NGUYEN THI THANH TRAM

THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN LEARNER AUTONOMY AND LEARNER MOTIVATION PERCEIVED BY FIRST- YEAR ENGLISH MAJORS AT NGUYEN TAT THANH

UNIVERSITY

Major: TEACHING ENGLISH TO SPEAKERS OF OTHER LANGUAGES Major code : 60140111

MASTER OF ARTS IN TESOL

Supervisor: Dr DUONG MY THAM

Ho Chi Minh City, September 2019

STATEMENT OF AUTHORSHIP

I certify that this thesis entitled “The Relationship between Learner Autonomy and Learner Motivation Perceived by First-Year English Majors at Nguyen Tat Thanh University” is my own work

Except where reference is made in the text of the thesis, this thesis contain material published elsewhere or extracted in whole or in part from a thesis by which I have qualified for or been awarded another degree or diploma

No other person’s work has been used without due acknowledgement in the main text of the thesis

This thesis has not been submitted for the award of any degree or diploma in any other tertiary institution

RETENTION AND USE OF THE THESIS

I hereby state that I, Nguyen Thi Thanh Tram, being a candidate for the degree of Master of Arts (TESOL), accept the requirements of the University relating to the retention and use of Master’s Theses deposited in the Library

In terms of these conditions, I agree that the original of my Master’s Thesis 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, and reproduction for theses

Ho Chi Minh City, 2019

NGUYEN THI THANH TRAM

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This Master of Art in TESOL thesis is the result of a fruitful collaboration of all the people whom have kindly contributed with an enormous commitment and enthusiasm in my research Without the help of those who supported me at all times and in all possible ways, it would not have been feasible for me to complete my M.A thesis

I am deeply indebted to my supervisor, Dr Duong My Tham, from Ho Chi Minh City Nong Lam University, whose compassion, encouragement and guidance throughout the research have helped in the completion of this thesis I have truly learned from the excellence of her skills and from her wide experience in research;

no words are adequate to describe the extent of my gratitude

I would like to express my particular gratitude to my beloved family for their unconditional love, understanding, encouragement, financial and spiritual support over time and distance

I owe a great debt of gratitude to the first-year English-majored participants at Nguyen Tat Thanh University who contributed data to this thesis

ABSTRACT

Learner autonomy in English education has received great concern from numerous researchers around the world as it is identified as one of the key competences for lifelong learning There is a wide variety of factors which affect learner autonomy such as age, prior knowledge, attitude, motivation, cooperative learning, aptitude, amount of exposure, and anxiety in foreign language learning Although learner motivation and learner autonomy has been popular in the field of foreign language teaching for many years, little attention has been paid to the link between motivation and autonomy Purposely, this study aimed at examining the relationship between learner autonomy and learner motivation in English language learning as perceived by the first-year English majors at Nguyen Tat Thanh University

Methodologically, the study was conducted at Nguyen Tat Thanh University with the participation of 165 first-year English majors Mixed-methods research was employed in this study, i.e., both quantitative and qualitative data were gathered from questionnaire and semi-structured interview As for data analysis, descriptive statistics (e.g., Mean, Standard Deviation, Frequencies, and Percentages) and inferential statistics (e.g Pearson Coefficients, Beta values) were exploited to analyze quantitative data, whereas qualitative data were analyzed through content analysis

To the findings, the majority of the first-year English-majored students at Nguyen Tat Thanh University displayed their high instrumental motivation on learning English Nevertheless, these first-year English majors manifested their integrative motivation at an average level Besides, the large number of the first-year English majors recognized their responsibilities in their language learning process Furthermore, the first-year English majors’ abilities inside class outperformed those outside class They tended to have better abilities to choose objectives, materials, activities inside the class Next, during the past one year (the first and second semesters of the first year), the first-year English majors had undertaken the outside and inside autonomous behaviors at an average degree The linkage between learner motivation and learner autonomy was perceived by the students, which was proved by both the questionnaire and semi-structured results In specific, while the

first-year English majors’ instrumental motivation made a significant contribution to the prediction of their perceived autonomous responsibilities, the integrative motivation did not In addition, both instrumental motivation and integrative motivation made a statistically significant unique contribution to autonomous abilities identified by the students, in which the first-year English-majored students’ instrumental motivation had the stronger impact on the autonomous abilities than their integrative motivation actually did Following that, the students’ outside behaviors of learner autonomy could derive from their own instrumental and integrative motivational domains Finally, only the surveyed students’ instrumental motivation impacted considerably their inside autonomous behaviors

Inferred from the study findings, the research paper concluded with some pedagogical implications, and a recommendation for further study in the line of research on developing learner autonomy and increasing learner motivation

Keywords: English majors; Learner autonomy; Learner motivation; Nguyen Tat Thanh

University

TABLE OF CONTENT

Page

STATEMENT OF AUTHORSHIP……… i

RETENTION AND USE OF THE THESIS……… ii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ……… iii

ABSTRACT ……….……… iv

TABLE OF CONTENT ……… vi

LIST OF TABLES ……… x

LIST OF FIGURES, CHARTS ……… xii

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION ……… 1

1.1 Background of the Study ……… 1

1.2 Problem Statement ……… 2

1.3 Rationale to the Study ……… 3

1.4 Research Aims ……… 5

1.5 Research Questions ……… 5

1.6 Significance of the Study ……… 5

1.7 Operational Definitions of Key Terms ……… 6

1.8 Structure of the Thesis ……… 6

CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW……… 8

2.1 Learner Motivation ……… 8

2.1.1 Definitions ……….………… 9

2.1.2 Classifications ……… 10

2.1.3 Motivation Conceptual Framework ……… 12

2.1.4 Strategies for Promoting Learner Motivation in EFL Classroom …… 13

2.2 Learner Autonomy ……… 14

2.2.1 Definitions ……… 14

2.2.2 Autonomous Learners ……… 15

2.2.3 Teachers’ Roles in Promoting Learner Autonomy in EFL Classroom… 16 2.2.4 Autonomy Conceptual Framework……… 18

2.3 Correlation between Learner Motivation and Learner Autonomy……… 19

2.4 Previous Studies……… 20

2.5 Research Gaps ……… 23

2.6 Chapter Summary ……… 25

CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY ……… 26

3.1 Research Design ……… 26

3.2 Research Questions ……… 28

3.3 Research Site and Participants ……… 28

3.3.1 Research Site ……… 28

3.3.2 Research Participants ……… 29

3.4 Research Instruments ……… 31

3.4.1 Student Questionnaire ……… 31

3.4.2 Student Semi-Structured Interview ……… 33

3.5 Data Collection and Analysis Procedure ……… 34

3.5.1 Collecting and Analyzing Quantitative Data from the Student Questionnaire ……….………

34 3.5.1.1 Collecting Phase……… 34

3.5.1.2 Analyzing Phase……… 35

3.5.2 Collecting and Analyzing Qualitative Data from the Student Interview 36 3.5.2.1 Collecting Phase……… 36

3.5.2.2 Analyzing Phase……… 37

3.6 Methodological Issues ……… 37

3.6.1 Reliability……… 38

3.6.2 Validity ……….……… 38

3.6.3 Ethnics ……….……… 39

3.6.4 Triangulation ……….……… 40

3.7 Chapter Summary ……….……… 40

CHAPTER 4: DATA ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS………… 41

4.1 Data Analysis ……….……… 41

4.1.1 Learner Motivation Perceived by the First-year English Majors……… 41

4.1.1.1 Overall Results of Learner Motivation……… 42

4.1.1.2 Detailed Results of Learner Motivation……… 43

4.1.2 Learner Autonomy ……….… 50

4.1.2.1 Overall Results of Learner Autonomy ……… 51

4.1.2.2 Detailed Results of Responsibilities ……… 52

4.1.2.3 Detailed Results of Abilities ……… 58

4.1.2.3 Detailed Results of Behaviors……… 63

4.1.3 The Relationship between Learner Motivation and Learner Autonomy 70 4.1.3.1 Results of Pearson Product-Moment Coefficients……… 70

4.1.3.2 Results of Multiple Regression Analysis……… 74

4.2 Discussion of Findings ……… 87

4.2.1 The First-Year English Majors’ Learner Motivation (Research Question 1) ……….………

87 4.2.2 The First-Year English Majors’ Learner Autonomy (Research Question 2) ……….………

89 4.2.3 The Relationship between Learner Motivation and Learner Autonomy (Research Question 3) ………

92 4.3 Chapter Summary……….……… 94

CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS……… 95

5.1 Conclusions……….……… 95

5.1.1 The First-Year English Majors’ Learner Motivation……… 95

5.1.2 The First-Year English Majors’ Learner Autonomy……… 96

5.1.3 The Relationship between Learner Motivation and Learner Autonomy 97 5.2 Recommendations……….……… 97

5.2.1 For English Majors……… 97

5.2.2 For Teachers……….………… 98

5.2.3 For Further Study……… 99

5.3 Limitations……… 100

5.4 Chapter Summary……….……… 100

REFERENCES……….……… 101

APPENDIXES ……….……… 109

APPENDIX A.1: QUESTIONNAIRE (ENGLISH VERSION) ……… 110

APPENDIX A.2: QUESTIONNAIRE (VIETNAMESE VERSION) ……… 114

APPENDIX B.1: SEMI-STRUCTURED INTERVIEW (ENGLISH VERSION) 118

APPENDIX B.2: SEMI-STRUCTURED INTERVIEW (VIETNAMESE VERSION) ……….………

119

APPENDIX C: CONSENT FORM (ENGLISH VERSION) ……… 120

APPENDIX D: A SAMPLED INTERVIEW TRANSCRIPT (ENGLISH VERSION) ……….………

121

LIST OF TABLES

Page

Table 2.1: Learner Motivation Conceptual Framework……… 12

Table 2.2: Teachers’ Roles in Fostering Learner Autonomy……… 17

Table 2.3: Learner Autonomy Conceptual Framework……… 18

Table 3.1: General Learning Outcomes of the EFL Curriculum ……… 28

Table 3.2: The Linkage between the Research Instruments and the Research Questions……….………

31 Table 4.1: Instrumental Motivation Perceived by the First-Year English Majors…… 45

Table 4.2: Integrative Motivation Perceived by the First-Year English Majors……… 46

Table 4.3: Responsibilities of Learner Autonomy Perceived by the First-Year English Majors……….………

53 Table 4.4: Abilities of Learner Autonomy Perceived by the First-Year English Majors 60 Table 4.5a: Out-Class Behaviors of Learner Autonomy Perceived by the First-Year English Majors……….………

64 Table 4.5b: In-Class Behaviors of Learner Autonomy Perceived by the First-Year English Majors………

67 Table 4.6: Correlation Coefficients ……… 71

Table 4.7a: Regression Analysis Model Summary (Model 1) ……… 75

Table 4.7b: ANOVA Results (Model 1) ……… 75

Table 4.7c: Coefficient Results (Model 1) ……… 76

Table 4.8a: Regression Analysis Model Summary (Model 2) ……… 77

Table 4.8b: ANOVA Results (Model 2) ……… 78

Table 4.8c: Coefficient Results (Model 2) ……… 79

Table 4.9a: Regression Analysis Model Summary (Model 3) ……… 80

Table 4.9b: ANOVA Results (Model 3) ……… 81

Table 4.9c: Coefficient Results (Model 3) ……… 82

Table 4.10a: Regression Analysis Model Summary (Model 4) ……… 83

Table 4.10b: ANOVA Results (Model 4) ……… 84

Table 4.10c: Coefficient Results (Model 4) ……… 84

Table 4.11: Summary of the Results of the Pearson Test……… 86

LIST OF FIGURES, CHARTS

Page

Figure 3.2: The Participants’ Demographic Information……… 30

Figure 4.1: The Overall Motivation Perceived by the First-Year English Majors…… 42

Figure 4.2: The Overall Autonomy Perceived by the First-Year English Majors…… 51

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Background of the Study

The 1986 Renovation policy that preordained for showing hospitality to foreign investment, socio-economic refinements provoked the teaching and learning

of English throughout Vietnam Indeed, English has become the mandatory subject

in the holistic Vietnamese education agenda from primary schools to secondary schools and then tertiary institutions In addition, English has been taken for specific purposes such as business, tourism, etc Generally speaking, English takes its stable position in any educational sites and its utmost significance to the Vietnamese context is scrupulous (Hoang, 2013)

Given the importance of English language education, Decision No TTg on the national educational three-stage agenda for “Teaching and Learning Foreign Languages in the National Educational System, Period 2 2008-2020” was mandated by the Deputy Prime Minister on September 30, 2008 The first stage (2008-2010) yearns for formulating a 10-year foreign language curriculum, inclusive

1400/QĐ-of devising the teaching materials, and sketching for piloting the curriculum from the third-grade level to the tertiary level; afterwards, the second stage (2011-2015) underscores the implementation of the 10-year foreign language curriculum into the reality; eventually, the third stage (2016-2020) is to make adjustments to the 10-year foreign language curriculum and to fabricate language programs for vocational schools, colleges, and universities To condense, the ultimate goal of the National Foreign Language Project is for Vietnamese students to become competent users of English by 2020

Peculiar to English programs at the Vietnamese tertiary level, Decision No 36/2004/QĐ-BGD-ĐT claims that the all-inclusive objective is to provide the students with knowledge, professional skills and behaviors in order that they are

able to work efficaciously in their particular areas The chassis of a bachelor’s degree English program in a Vietnamese tertiary institution must comply with that stipulated by the Vietnamese Ministry of Education and Training in 2004 At this educational system, the university students cover all pre-established courses in the general knowledge phase, and then they transfer to their sub-major in the specialized phase like Interpretation and Translation, TESOL, and Business, Literature, etc

1.2 Problem Statement

In these days, in lieu of passive listeners, Asian students seem to expect to be more independent and autonomous (Littlewood, 2000) However, profoundly influenced by Confucian perspective, teaching and learning English in Vietnamese context is traditionally aimed to “offering students a fish” and far from “teaching them how to fish”, in which knowledge transmission seems to be preferred to knowledge construction (Nguyen, 2014) By the same token, Tran (2007) problematized that the teachers have tendency to control the classrooms strictly while the students inherently turn out to be passive receivers of language knowledge

in place of language construction That is to say, the teacher traditionally plays the authority as a source of knowledge, deciding on what to learn and how to learn through designing classroom activities, motivating the students and providing authoritative comments on students’ language performance in the classroom In addition, the allotted time for class periods is quite rigid, so the teacher needs to direct the class activities and focus on the main content for examinations rather than

on extra activities (Dang, 2012) Inferentially, the Vietnamese students seem not to

be fostered their learner autonomy during this educational system; in other words, the independence and activeness in language learning of the students was deemed to

be ignored

Peculiar to the arena of the language education in the Vietnamese context, Grammar-Translation method, and Audio-Lingual method have vastly dominated the national educational system for a long time, in which the teacher is the authority

in a classroom and the teacher provides students with a good model for imitation (Harmer, 2007) As a result, EFL learners can hardly become autonomous if they are too dependent on the teachers Besides, Dang (2012) found that English majors deem to be unfamiliar with learning activities and assignments which do not provide help from the teacher Furthermore, one of the Vietnamese learners’ perils is the ability to seek resources for their learning (Duong, 2015) In lieu of that, these students only work with the predetermined learning materials In general, the Vietnamese learners are encouraged to autonomously seek the objectives, to choose

the contents, to select appropriate learning strategies, and to control what they learn 1.3 Rationale to the Study

Academically, learner autonomy in English education has become the key concern from numerous researchers around the world such as Benson (2007), Benson (2011), and Littlewood (1996) The evolution of learner autonomy arena has been become the main skeleton of language education over the last decades, which

is deemed to be “one of the key competences for lifelong learning” (European Commission, 2006, as cited in Vázquez, 2014, p 59) Students need to develop their own capacities such as creativity, critical thinking, social responsibility, decision-making and problem-solving skills, etc since language learning process is purposefully framed through the students’ own reflection on how they learn and manage their learning strategies (Al-Asmari, 2013)

According to Zarei and Elakaei (2012), there are a lot of different factors which engender learner autonomy level such as age, attitude, motivation, amount of exposure, and language anxiety and so on In academic, learning motivation and learner autonomy has been main concern in the realm of foreign language teaching

for many years, because both are closely related to the prosperity of language learning (Dörnyei & Ushioda, 2013) Nevertheless, it seemed that the tie-up between these variables was not focal point of many research pieces (Spratt, Humphreys, & Chan, 2002; Cheng & Cheng, 2013) Indeed, “autonomous learners are by definition motivated learners” (Dörnyei, 2001, p 59) It is argued that the students who had intrinsic motivation are more efficient learners The linkage between learner autonomy and motivation was also indicated by the study of Spratt, Humphreys, and Chan (2002) in which more motivated language learners often engaged in more autonomous learning practices outside class This study also agreed with the positive correlation between learner autonomy and learning motivation; furthermore, it revealed that a lack of motivation may hamper the development of learner autonomy Alternatively saying, motivation plays a key predictor of the extent to which students are ready to learn autonomously

1.4 Research Aims

First, the study sheds light on the Nguyen Tat Thanh University first-year English majors’ self-perceptions of their motivation types and extent to their language learning Secondly, this study also purposely scrutinizes these students’ self-evaluation of their autonomous learning Thirdly, this study deliberately provides a comprehensive examination of the relationship between learner motivation and learner autonomy level in EFL learning among the first-year English majors at Nguyen Tat Thanh University

2 How do Nguyen Tat Thanh University first-year English majors self-evaluate their autonomy in English language learning?

3 Is there a correlation between the students’ motivation and their autonomy?

If so, how?

1.6 Significance of the Study

First, it is hoped that an exploration of learner motivation can assist both teachers and learners to identify causal factors impacting the learners’ existing learning motivation as well as to suggest practical solutions to enhance motivational degree in their language learning;

Second, based on the findings of learner autonomy levels, the study can raise the teachers’ and administrators’ awareness of the essence of autonomous learning among EFL learners as well as related aspects of teacher training, curriculum development, and material design for building up learner autonomy;

Third, within the results of the links between learner motivation and learner autonomy in EFL learning, the study can help the institute administrators and the teachers work toward an improvement of their motivation and autonomy, which reinforces their language learning achievement at the very earliest stage of the first year

Fourth, this study will be the basis and the interest for the further research on this topic Through the sought information of the learners’ motivation and autonomy, language teaching and learning quality at Nguyen Tat Thanh University

1.7 Operational Definitions of Key Terms

English Majors: This term refers to Vietnamese first-year students

specializing in English at Nguyen Tat Thanh University of Vietnam;

Learner Autonomy: In this study, learner autonomy is a gradual

construction of capacity but not inborn traits (capacity), and is learners’ willingness

to be responsible for their own learning (responsibility), happening both inside and outside the classroom (behavior) This definition is based on that of different researchers such as Holec (1981), Dam, Eriksson, Little, Miliander and Trebbi (1990), and Littlewood (1996) In this study, three aspects of learner autonomy are expounded, i.e responsibilities, abilities, outside and inside behaviors;

Learner Motivation: is “the thoughts and feelings which make us want to

and continue to want to do something and which turn our wishes into action” (Spratt, Pulverness, & Williams, 2011, p 53) In this study, two types of motivation,

including instrumental motivation and integrative motivation, are used

1.8 Structure of the Thesis

The present thesis is comprised of five main chapters as follows:

The current chapter, Introduction, includes the background, the problem statement, the rationale to the study, the research aims, the research questions, the significance of the study, and the definition of operational terms

As its name evinces, Chapter 2, Literature Review, provides the theoretical background to this research such as definitions and classifications of learner motivation, of learner autonomy; from that, conceptual framework of these variables

is constructed Most importantly, the chapter moves on to summarize some related previous studies, helping the researcher to spotlight the gaps and to draw out some useful lessons for the coming study

In Chapter 3, Methodology, the research setting and participants, the data collection instruments are clearly described Besides, the procedures of collecting and analyzing data are clarified Finally, some methodological issues such as validity, reliability and ethnics are discussed

Chapter 4, Data Analysis and Discussion, is attributed to reporting the data obtained from the instruments, and afterwards discussing the results in association with the research questions schemed in Chapter 1

In Chapter 5, Conclusion and Recommendations, the main findings of the study are briefly summarized based on the research questions Based on these findings, some implications for stakeholders of this study are made Following that, some limitations of this study are divulged Finally, some recommendations for the further study are presented

CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW

This chapter provides a theoretical basis for the present study with some fundamental theories and presuppositions of learner motivation, learner autonomy, the correlation between learner motivation and learner autonomy, and previous studies First of all, the notion of learner motivation is clarified by its definition, classifications, motivational conceptual framework as well as motivational strategies Following that, the concept of learner autonomy, which includes its definition, the characteristics of an autonomous language learner, teacher’s roles and learners’ roles in building up learner autonomy, and the conceptual framework of learner autonomy term is taken into consideration Thirdly, the correlation between these aforementioned variables is discussed in a separate section Finally, a summary of previous studies are critically review, from which some useful lessons can be learned and a research gap can be highlighted

2.1 Learner Motivation

Motivation is a key factor for eliciting the success or failure of any difficult activity (Richards & Schmidt, 2002) In other words, success in a task is due to the fact that someone is highly motivated Understanding the types of motivation is of great importance (Brown, 2000) In this section, definition and types of motivation are critically reviewed, followed by a scrutiny of strategies promoting EFL learners’ motivation As a vital part, a conceptual framework of learner motivation is constructed, which is directly related to the first research question

2.1.1 Definitions

Motivation is an essential ingredient of language acquisition (Brewer & Burgess, 2005) Gardner (1985) posits that with the intention of being motivated, the learner requires and needs to have something to anticipate and expect, a reason having to do with aim or target.This term has been defined in different ways

First, motivation refers to the amalgamation of attempt, desire to obtain the objective of learning the language as well as attitudes towards learning the language (Gardner, 1985) That is to say, motivation to learn a foreign language refers to the extent to which the individual make an endeavor to learn the language because of a desire to do so By the same token, Oxford and Shearin (1994) define motivation as

a desire to attain an objective, along with the inner energy to work towards that objective Besides, motivation is reckoned as goal-directed behaviors or orientations (Crookes & Schmidt, 1991),and a motivated individual will make him much effort and endeavor to participate in a task, sets goals and has strategies to achieve those goals (Smith, 2009) Most simply, Narayanan (2006) defines that motivation is the reason or reasons behind one’s actions or behaviors.

Based on the definitions mentioned above, the researcher deduces that motivation provides learners with a learning attitude or desire and then effort and actions to follow and achieve the set goal This operational definition of motivation

is consistent with that defined by Spratt, Pulverness and Williams (2011):

Motivation is the thoughts and feelings which make us want to and continue

to want to do something and which turn our wishes into action Motivation influences why people decide to do something, how long they keep want to do

it, how they work to achieve it.(p 53)

2.1.2 Classifications

In respect of learner motivation classifications, language learning motivation was originally viewed in terms of two primary types, i.e instrumental motivation and integrative motivation (Gardner & Lambert, 1972):

The former type refers to that which is aroused by external learner goals or pragmatic, functional motives such as passing exams or furthering a career According to Hudson (2000), it is the aspiration to get practical benefits from the study of a second language In other words, if a person learns a language chiefly for

a purpose like getting a job or accomplishing an academic assignment, this person is aspired by his instrumental motivation

The latter type refers to the learners’ need to learn about, associate or socialize with the people who use it or because of purpose or intention to participate

or integrate in the second language using the same language in that community (Gardner, 1985)

These two types of motivation can affect and control the procedure and outcome of learning (Gardner & MacIntyre, 1993) In addition,Cook (2000) further believes that the integrative and instrumental motivation suggested by Gardner and Lambert is extravagantly useful and effective factor for foreign language learning

Ryan and Deci (2000) introduce two other types of motivation, that is, intrinsic motivation and extrinsic motivation In brief, intrinsic motivation is mental satisfaction which is got by others’ praise, while, extrinsic motivation is activated by external factors such as good marks In specific,

Intrinsic motivation is the eagerness and interest to do and take part in some certain activities because an individual feels that they are attractive and pleasant (Jafari, 2012) Intrinsic motivation refers to the motivation which is originated inside

a person (Anjomshoa & Sadighi, 2015) Students who have intrinsic motivation are

inclined to stay with intricate problems and gain knowledge from their mistakes (Pintrich & Schunk, 1996)

Extrinsic motivation is the propensity to engage in activities because of the reasons which do not link to the activity These reasons can be the prediction of reward or punishment, like being successful in the exam or getting a good mark (Jafari, 2012) Those who are extrinsically motivated perform and do affairs as they think that their contribution will generate results like a reward, teacher admiration (Pintrich & Schunk, 1996) It seems that this type does not fit the adult students’ psychological traits

In research, it is likely to have a conflation between the intrinsic/ extrinsic motivation with the integrative/ instrumental motivation to some extent Indeed, intrinsic motivation, like integrative motivation, is derived from the personal interests and positive attitudes and feelings In another point, instrumental and integrative motivation types might also fabricate modes of extrinsic motivation as they both identify reasons for learning a language as a means to get a good outcome (Ushioda, 2001) Besides, Brown (2000) indicates the relationship between these two kinds of motivation As extrinsic motivation may turn out to be integrative motivation if someone else wants the EFL learner to know the EFL for integrative purposes; extrinsic motivation may turn out to be instrumental motivation if an external power wishes the EFL learner to learn the EFL language Thus, in this study, the researcher will develop the motivation instruments based on the two types

of instrumental and integrative motivation since these two kinds are more precise and more appropriate to characteristics of tertiary leveled students

2.1.3 Motivation Conceptual Framework

The researcher designs motivation-related based on the study of Wimolmas (2013), which focuses on the two chosen types of motivation (i.e., instrumental and integrative) Instrumental motivation in this study focuses on the aspiration to get practical benefits from the study of a foreign language, while integrative motivation

is attached to the need to get entertaining and communicative purposes Table 2.1 below presents the conceptual framework of motivation part

Table 2.1

Motivation Conceptual Framework

Learner Motivation Instrumental Motivation Integrative Motivation

1 The role of English learning

 In work

 In study

1 The vitality of language proficiency

2 The motive for English learning

3 The need of efforts

1 The role of English learning

 In entertainment

 In real-life communication

2 The attitudes in language learning

2.1.4 Strategies for Promoting Learner Motivation in EFL Classroom

Given the key role of learning motivation to the success of the EFL learning process, the teachers should seek strategies to motivate EFL learners However, in the past 50 years, most of the studies have paid scanty attention to focusing on the practical strategies and teaching practices on promoting their students’ motivation Motivational strategies in EFL research are techniques used by EFL teachers to promote and maintain students’ motivation to learn English (Dörnyei, 2001)

In the EFL learning context, Dörnyei (2001, pp 28-29) divides the motivational strategies into four categories Firstly, the teachers should create the basic motivational conditions (e.g., creating a comfortable and safe atmosphere in the classroom and formulating group rules) Secondly, it is imperative that the teachers generate initial motivation (e.g., improving students’ attitudes towards the language and making it easier for them to succeed) Thirdly, teachers need to maintain and protect motivation (e.g., supporting students’ self-reliance or developing learner autonomy) Lastly, the teachers should encourage positive retrospective self-evaluation (e.g., giving positive feedback and prizes to learners)

Dörnyei and Csizer (1998) specify some strategies for motivating students

To the first strategy, the teachers should set up a comfortable atmosphere in the classroom for the students to work To the second strategy, the teachers should seek tasks and activities appropriate to the students’ existing levels To the third strategy, the teachers should make a good rapport with their students in the classrooms To the fourth strategy, the teachers should encourage their students to use language confidently, but overemphasize correction To the fifth strategy, the teachers need to make the class environment more interesting and comfortable, which stimulates the students to attend to the class regularly To the sixth strategy, the teachers should grant more opportunities for their students to choose the materials and content as well as the learning activities To the seventh strategy, the teachers should help students to realize their learning goals

In addition, Guilloteaux and Dörnyei (2008) divide motivation strategies into the two main categories of teachers’ communicative style and language classroom activities Teachers’ communicative style means the way teachers organize communication in classes English teachers may deploy different teaching strategies

to communicate with learners during lessons, including group work and comments for their improvements

Besides, language classroom activities influence learners’ motivation in an EFL (Dörnyei, 2001) Designing class activities in an interesting way to get all learners involved in a class which will help them to attain EFL achievement

It is necessary for language teachers to focus on the promotion and activation

of their learners’ motivation, which is seen as “central teaching effectiveness” (Dörnyei, 2013, p 523) When motivational strategies are effectively enacted in the class, the students’ learning outcomes can more fruitful

2.2 Learner Autonomy

With the aim of providing readers with a brief introduction of the concept of learner autonomy, it is vital to discuss definitions of learner autonomy, the characteristics of an autonomous learner, and teachers’ roles in promoting learner autonomy

2.2.1 Definitions

There are a lot of definitions of learner autonomy term; however, this term seemed to be defined subjectively (Han, 2014) Actually, it is not easy to give a holistic definition of this term which can be affected by different angles

First of all, Holec (1981) defines this term in four aspects The first aspect, learner autonomy is pertinent to learner themselves To the second aspect, learner autonomy is an end product of systematic and long process To the third aspect, learner autonomy involves both psychology and actions of the students during their learning path To the last aspect, this term embodies the students’ responsibilities for their learning process

Besides, learner autonomy indicated to “a capacity and willingness to act independently and in cooperation with others, as a social, responsible person” (Dam, Eriksson, Little, Miliander & Trebbi, 1990, p 102) To interpret, capacity depends

on knowledge and skills, while willingness depends on the motivation and

self-efficacy a learner has for his learning responsibilities (Littlewood (1996) What is more, learner autonomy refers to the students’ ability to self-reflect and self-regulate their own learning behaviors (Wenden, 1991)

In sum, Sinclair (2000) summarizes some typical traits of learner autonomy above, which are applied in this study First, learner autonomy is an incremental erection of capacity (Holec, 1981) Second, learner autonomy emphasizes learners’ willingness to be responsible for their own learning (Dam, Eriksson, Little, Miliander & Trebbi, 1990; Littlewood, 2000) Third, learner autonomy can happen both inside and outside the classroom (Little, 1999) In this study, the researcher will focus on three components of learner autonomy, that is, ability (capacity), responsibility and behaviors (inside and outside the class)

2.2.2 Autonomous Learners

Typical traits of autonomous learners are clarified by several authors such as Wenden (1991), Nunan (1997), Littlewood (2000), and Benson (2003), Riihimäki (2013)

First, an autonomous learner refers to “someone who is able to reflect on his

or her own learning, sets goals and evaluates their own progress” (Riihimäki, 2013,

p 21) To do so, learners are required to manipulate their mental processing and use metacognitive strategies to plan, control and evaluate what to be learnt (Wenden, 1991) Benson (2003) adds that an autonomous learner should involve in choosing learning content and materials In the same fashion, to become a fully autonomous learner, the students need to take several responsibilities such as deciding on learning objectives, selecting learning methods, and evaluating process, etc (Nunan, 1997)

Littlewood (2000) pinpoints two autonomous responsibilities of the students

in language learning First, students should identify their own responsibilities for their own learning Second, students have to undertake direct behaviors such as deciding on learning objectives, selecting learning methods, and evaluating process

In sum, some characteristics of an autonomous learner are reviewed above The first trait is that an autonomous learner can manipulate metacognitive strategies

to self-monitor learning process (Wenden, 1991) The second trait is that this person can decide on learning objectives, selecting learning methods (Littlewood, 2000) The third trait is that autonomous learners should involve in making choice of learning content (Benson, 2003) The last trait is that he is able to set goals and evaluate learning progress (Riihimäki, 2013) These characteristics are summated in Duong (2015) that to become autonomous learners, students must have “[…] the ability to make decisions concerning the management, organization, and evaluation

of their learning, the ability to take notice of their own learning […]” (p 23)

2.2.3 Teachers’ Roles in Promoting Learner Autonomy in EFL Classroom

There can be no doubt that many teachers are expecting to change the classroom atmosphere and conditions Yet, Han (2014) avows that the success of promoting learner autonomy in class depends on the perceptions of the teachers and the students about their roles and functions It is necessarily important to review some learner-centered teaching roles in language education, which is summated in Table 2.2 Overall, according to Duong and Nguyen (2019), to increase the learner autonomy level, the teachers “should guide them [the students] to apply different language learning strategies in obtaining their language learning process”(p 117)

Table 2.2

Teachers’ Roles in Fostering Learner Autonomy

According to Han (2014), teachers’ roles for promoting learner autonomy are varied, but the facilitator role should be common fashion It is obvious that to build

up learner autonomy, teachers should not attribute themselves to authority of classroom learning (Han, 2014) On the contrary, the teachers have to amend their roles to help language learners to develop their learner autonomy The ideal roles of the teachers for an autonomous class include facilitators, managers, resources,

counselors and organizers In short, teachers play a critical role in the learning process of students in an autonomous learning environment, and in developing their own responsibilities

2.2.4 Autonomy Conceptual Framework

In this study, the researcher focuses on the three components of learner autonomy including responsibilities, abilities, and behaviors inside and outside classrooms The learner autonomy conceptual framework is developed from the study of Liu (2012)

 Decide learning strategies

 Decide learning content

3 Post-course, Post-lesson

 Evaluate learning outcome

 Decide outside learning

 Further practice

2.3 Correlation between Learner Motivation and Learner Autonomy

In the EFL realm, the association between autonomy and motivation in language acquisition has been recognized by many researchers (e.g., Dickinson, 1995; Ushioda, 1996; Dörnyei & Csizér, 1998; Spratt, Humphreys & Chan, 2002; Vandergrift, 2005)

Some scholars agree that motivation comes first and leads to autonomy such

as Spratt, Humphreys and Chan (2002), Vandergrift (2005) Spratt et al (2002) reported that more motivated language learners tended to engage in more autonomous learning practices outside class The results not only supported the positive relation between autonomy and motivation but also revealed that a lack of motivation may hamper the development of learner autonomy Likewise, Vandergrift (2005) pinpoints that only those who have an interest or motivation (extrinsic or intrinsic) to learn a language can have the necessary discipline to engage in hard work and devotion to learning the target language To emphasize the link between motivation and autonomy in this direction, Ushioda (1996) contends that “without motivation, there is no autonomy” (p 40)

However, some scholars argue that motivation comes after learner autonomy (e.g., Dickinson, 1995; Dörnyei & Csizér, 1998) For example, Dickinson (1995) discusses that success in EFL/ ESL learning and enhanced motivation will occur when a learner has more control of his own learning process The learner can have a certain intrinsic motivation in learning, if he takes responsibility in the learning process like planning, monitoring and self-evaluating

To sum up, Dörnyei and Ushioda (2013) conclude is that motivation, autonomy and learning achievement are interrelated forming a cyclical process Accordingly, the researcher would like to check if learner motivation was a

significant condition of learner autonomy in EFL learning among the first-year English majors at Nguyen Tat Thanh University

2.4 Previous Studies

Nguyen (2009) conducted a two-phase study to investigate learner autonomy

in Vietnam, and to explore the relationship between learner autonomy and language outcomes The participants of this study were 388 English majors in the Vietnamese tertiary institutions In the first phase, an exploratory correlational study was conducted among 177 students to grasp their perceptions of learner autonomy facets, their activities both inside and outside the classroom In the second phase, an intervention study was conducted with the participation of 37 students in an experimental group, and 54 students in two control groups, exploring the effects of a learner-based approach to promoting learner autonomy In the first phase, the findings revealed that Vietnamese students seemed to cover all the required tasks and exams Besides, they would rather practice receptive skills than productive skills Lastly, the task-specific training of self-regulation in the second phase resulted in improving writing performance and learner autonomy Overall, training learners in metacognitive regulation improved learners’ writing ability and their autonomy in learning

Zarei and Elakaei (2012) conducted their quantitative study to investigate the relationship between learner autonomy and attitude as well as the relationship between learner autonomy and motivation In the present study, a sample of 158 Iranian EFL students studying Teaching English and English Translation (both males and females) at Qazvin and Takestan State and Islamic Azad Universities was selected The data collection instruments included a Michigan English Language Proficiency Test, a 21-item learner autonomy questionnaire, and a 25-item attitude/ motivation questionnaire The findings of this study indicated that there was a significant correlation between motivation and learner autonomy In other words,

the findings revealed that more motivated students are more autonomous Besides, the results of the Pearson revealed a positive but not significant relationship between attitude and learner autonomy

Liu (2012) carried out a study to clarify the relationships between language anxiety, learning motivation, autonomy, and language proficiency The subjects of the study were first-year non-English major undergraduates The findings indicated that foreign language anxiety is prevalent among the students Among the variables investigated in this study, learning motivation, followed by listening proficiency, reading proficiency, and learner autonomy, had the highest correlation with foreign language anxiety; all the correlations were highly significant and negative Results from the stepwise regression predicting language proficiency indicated that both learner anxiety and autonomy contributed significantly to the prediction of proficiency

Wimolmas (2013) undertook a study to examine the type and level of English language learning motivation (instrumental or integrative) of 30 first-year undergraduate students at an international institute of engineering and technology in Thailand A modified motivational survey of 20 items adapted from AMTB was conducted The main findings showed that the students were relatively “highly” motivated and found to be slightly more “instrumentally” motivated to learn English This revealed that instrumental motivation was a significant factor among this group of students learning English

Liu’s (2015) study aimed to testify the role of motivation on learner autonomy with the participation of 150 first-year university students (70 men and 80 women) who were non-English majors in Central Taiwan The instruments of this study consisted of a 26-item motivation questionnaire developed from Liu (2012), and a 43-item autonomy questionnaire developed by Chan, Spratt, and Humphreys (2002) The findings showed that motivation and autonomy were highly, positively

correlated Motivation contributed to half of the variance in autonomy, serving as a strong predictor for and an indispensable factor influencing the degrees of learner

autonomy

Bravo, Intriago, Holguín, Garzon and Arcia (2017) conducted a quantitative research to examine how different levels of motivation related to frequency of autonomous language learning activities done by undergraduate students The sample included 862 college students from 10 vocational training programs of a public university located in Ecuador, South America The instrument employed in the study was a Likert scale questionnaire, which was adapted from Spratt et al (2002) Based on the results of the Chi-square of Pearson, there were significant relationships between: the language learning stimulation performed by professors and participants learning attitudes at a high frequency level The activities that showed greater autonomy were: listening to songs, worrying about correct pronunciation, and noting down interesting words or expressions in English, while the activities that Ecuadorian EFL learners did with the least frequency were: enrolling in an online English language course, chatting online with a foreigner in English, and writing an essay in English Learning is still seen as teacher dependent and as such, the idea of going to a website to learn a language is difficult to grasp as effective

2.5 Research Gaps

The reviewed literature shed on light that most of the previous studies proved positive correlation between learner motivation and learner autonomy, in which the former played as an indicator of the latter However, the existing body of literature

in this arena has emanated some inadequacies

It is noteworthy that motivation and learner autonomy in language learning have been constantly explored such as in 2009, 2012, 2013, 2015 and 2017

However, either learning motivation or learner motivation was inspected in some studies Besides, the previous studies on these variables have been carried out both inside and outside of the Vietnamese context such as Taiwan, Thailand, and Iran However, there has been no study at Nguyen Tat Thanh University (Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam) so far Thus, it was necessary to conduct an exploratory study on these two variables at the same time at Nguyen Tat Thanh University with the purpose of improving its students’ motivation and autonomous learning ability The first and second research questions were formulated, respectively

It is notoriously acknowledged that motivation levels exert an ample impact

on learner autonomy and learning achievement However, this correlation was only found in a few studies (e.g Liu, 2012; Zarei & Elakaei, 2012; Liu, 2015; Bravo, Intriago, Holguín, Garzon & Arcia, 2017) Therefore, the current study is purposely dedicated to elucidating this correlation, which turned out to be the focal point of the third research question

In respect of research design and research instruments, almost all the previous studies were under a quantitative research paradigm within the aid of only questionnaires to collect data However, to get sufficient and convincing information and to answer the research questions holistically, a mixed-methods design should be employed Therefore, the researcher decided to choose this research design, a combination of both quantitative and qualitative research, with the involvement of questionnaire and semi-structured interview

Overall, the previous studies provided useful lessons for the researcher; besides, they also helped the researcher to identify a research gap Generally speaking, the present study would be conducted at Nguyen Tat Thanh University with a mixed-methods research design by gathering both quantitative and qualitative data through different instruments such as questionnaires and interviews These instruments could help the researcher clarify the first-year EFL majors’ motivation

types and learner autonomy levels, and the correlation between these two variables

as well

2.6 Chapter Summary

To recap, this important section has just presented an extensive understanding

of basic theories of learner motivation (e.g., definitions, types), learner autonomy (definitions, students’ roles, and teacher’s roles), the linkage between learner autonomy and learner motivation Conceptual sub-frameworks of learning motivation and learner autonomy were constructed based on these theoretical grounds In addition, it provided the researcher with some previous related studies, spotting research gaps

CHAPTER 3 METHODOLOGY

The present chapter is dedicated to describing the theoretical part for the whole study In specific, research design is introduced, followed by the restatement

of the research questions Additionally, the setting and participants of this research are precisely described As an inevitable part of this chapter, the research instruments are depicted in terms of their definition, rationale and construction Afterwards, the procedures of collection and analysis of these research instruments are chronicled in details Finally, some methodological issues are discussed

3.1 Research Design

Creswell enumerates three prominent types of research design, including quantitative design, qualitative design and mixed-methods design Galvanized by conjecture that the amalgamation of both qualitative and quantitative data can help

“better understand the research problem and question than either method by itself” (Creswell, 2012, p 535), this current study was deliberately grounded in a mixed method design The purpose of mixed-methods design was to provide a complete analysis of the research problem (Creswell, 2012); accordingly, the research problem can be elicited to full In specific, the researcher exploited the manoeuvring

of questionnaire and semi-structured interview to elucidate the relationship between the two variables, i.e learner motivation and learner autonomy The research design

is graphically depicted as follows

Figure 3.1: Research Design