Motivation in Learning English Language

Contributed by:
Steve
The collected data were summarized and analyzed by using SPSS software. The findings show that the students that participated in the study were highly motivated in English learning, and more instrumentally motivated. The study also examined some factors that influence motivation such as students’ gender, the school year, the time students have spent learning English, and parental ability in speaking English. The study shows that the school year and parental English ability had a significant influence on students' motivation in English language learning. The problems that the students face during the learning process were also discussed. Some recommendations were given to improve the students' motivation in English learning.
1. European Journal of Educational Sciences, EJES March 2019 edition Vol.6 No.1 ISSN 1857- 6036
Motivation in Learning English Language: a case
Study at Vietnam National University, Hanoi
Huy Cuong Nguyen, PhD
The University of Szeged, Hungary
Doi: 10.19044/ejes.v6no1a4 URL:http://dx.doi.org/10.19044/ejes.v6no1a4
In recent times, English has become the global language and plays an
important role in order for people to communicate and fit into the real world.
Learning and using English has become a necessary need of many people,
particularly the young generation. Motivation is considered as one of the
fundamental factors in successfully learning a language. This paper focuses
on investigating the type and level of motivation in English language learning.
The instrument of the study was adopted from Gardner’s Attitude/Motivation
Test Battery (AMTB). The participants in this study includes 371 first and
second-year students of Vietnam National University, Hanoi – University of
Engineering and Technology (VNU-UET). The collected data were
summarized and analyzed by using SPSS software. The findings show that the
students that participated in the study were highly motivated in English
learning, and more instrumentally motivated. The study also examined some
factors that influence motivation such as students’ gender, the school year, the
time students have spent in learning English, and parental ability in speaking
English. The study shows that the school year and parental English ability had
a significant influence on students' motivation in English language learning.
The problems that the students face during the learning process was also
discussed. Some recommendations were given to improve the students'
motivation in English learning.
Keywords: Motivation, instrumental motivation, integrative motivation,
language learning.
Presently, English is the global language and it plays an important role
in order for people to communicate and fit into the real world. Although
spending at least three years of learning English language education, many
Vietnamese high-school leavers are still not proficient in this language. This
is the reason why most of the institutions in Vietnam have to provide further
2. European Journal of Educational Sciences, EJES March 2019 edition Vol.6 No.1 ISSN 1857- 6036
English language support for the first 2-years of higher education. However,
the employers complain a lot about the level of English language proficiency
among graduates. There are many factors responsible for low proficiency in
English among vietnamese students. One of the factors might be attributed to
the students motivation towards English language. This is because students’
motivation has been extensively considered as an important factor which
affects the rate and the success of foreign language learning (Ellis, 1994).
McDonough (1983) also confirmed that “motivation of the students is one of
the most important factors influencing their success or failure in learning the
The study aims to use one quantitative method to investigate the
motivation of university students in Vietnam pertaining to the study of English
as a foreign language, the English speaking people, and the students’ future
expectations about English. Furthermore, a better understanding of student’s
motivation may help English curriculum and instruction designers to build
language learning and teaching programs which generate the motivation most
conducive for more successful learners of English (Midraji, 2003).
Background of the Study
The VNU University of Engineering and Technology (VNU-UET)
was founded by the decision of the Prime Minister of Vietnam as a member
university of the Vietnam National University, Hanoi (VNU). The VNU-UET
offers bachelor, master, and doctoral degree programs in engineering,
technology, and management. As a leading university in engineering and
technology in Vietnam, VNU-UET always tries to provide students with more
opportunities to improve their English skills. In addition to the English skills
the students have achieved in the high school education, most of the bachelor
degree programs of VNU-UET provide students with 4 courses of general
English (equally 20 credits) in the first 2-years of the programs. It is expected
that the students of VNU-UET take the courses in English and use it as the
medium of instruction. However, the students’ progress in English skills is
still not satisfactory. There are still many negative behaviors indicating that
the students have low motivation to learn English as a foreign language.
The study on motivation to learn English based on the responses of the
first and second-year undergraduate students at VNU-UET is expected to
provide important information in determining the extent and type of their
motivation to learn English. A better understanding about the motivation to
learn English would help the university and English teachers work together to
improve the language learning environment and to stimulate students’
motivation. This would lead to better achievement in learning English as a
foreign language for the first 2-years of undergraduate education and training.
50
3. European Journal of Educational Sciences, EJES March 2019 edition Vol.6 No.1 ISSN 1857- 6036
Objectives of the Study
This small-scale study was implemented to determine the motivational
type and level of the first and second year undergraduate students at VNU-
UET, and to determine the factors that influence the students’ motivation in
learning English. The other objectives of this study are to find out the language
difficulties that the students encountered during the learning process and to
provide some recommendations for improving the students' motivation in
learning English.
Research Questions
The following research questions addressed in this study are:
(a) What is the motivation for learning English as a foreign language by the
students at VNU-UET?
(b) How does the students’ background affect their motivation in learning
English as a foreign language?
(c) What are the difficulties that students encounter during the learning
Review of Literature
The Motivation for Learning a Foreign Language
Motivation is a multifaceted concept that has been the subject of
scholarly researches in different academic areas and no single available theory
has yet captured its total complexity (Dörnyei, 2001). Gardner (2006) also
confirmed that “motivation is a very complex phenomenon with many
facets…thus it is not possible to give a simple definition.” This is because the
expression of motivation has been investigated differently by different
perspectives. On the behavioral perspective, motivation is “quite simply the
anticipation of reward” (Brown, 2000). Whereas the cognitive perspective
views the term of motivation as being more related to the student’s decisions,
and the choices students make as to what experiences or goals they will
approach or avoid, and the degree of effort they will exert in that respect. For
the constructivists in their definition of motivation, they place further
emphasis on the social context as well as the individual’s decisions.
Regardless of the differences in all the definitions of motivation given by the
three different perspectives, the concept “needs” is emphasized, that is, “the
fulfillment of needs is rewarding, requires choices, and in many cases must be
interpreted in a social context” (Brown, 2000).
In terms of language learning, there are many definitions of
motivation. Lightbown and Spada (1999) noted that motivation in second
language learning is quite complicated to study. This can be explained in terms
of two factors: students’ communicative needs and their attitudes towards the
second language community. In addition, Parsons, Hinson and Brown (2001)
4. European Journal of Educational Sciences, EJES March 2019 edition Vol.6 No.1 ISSN 1857- 6036
defined motivation as an important component or factor in the learning
process. Learning and motivation have the same importance in order to
achieve something. Learning helps students gain new knowledge and skills,
and motivation pushes them or encourages them to go through the learning
Gardner (1983), in his socio-educational model, considered that
motivation is perceived to be composed of three elements such as: effort,
desire, and effect. The effort refers to the time the student spend on a foreign
language learning and the drive of the student. The desire indicates how much
the student wants to become proficient in the language, while the effect means
the student’s emotional reactions which is related to language learning.
Types of Motivation for Learning a Foreign Language
The type of motivation answers the question of why a person is
learning a language. The motivation here refers to the goal of learning a
language. Many different reasons for learning a language could be listed such
as: to be able to speak with members of that language community, to get a job,
to improve one’s education, to be able to travel, to please their parents, to
satisfy a language requirement, to gain social power, etc.
Harmer (1991) used the word “goal” to classify the motivation in
language learning into two different types which include:
(a) Short-term goal: It means that students wish to succeed in doing something
in the near future. For example, students who want to pass their examination
or get a good grade/high scores.
(b) Long-term goal: It refers to a wish that students want to get a better job in
the future and be able to communicate with people who use the language (the
target language) that they learn.
Gardner (1985) shows it is possible to classify the reasons for language
learning so that they reflect some ultimate aims. Once classified, various
categories would appear best identified as orientations in order to keep
conceptual clarity. Ellis (1986) discussed the need to classify the reasons for
language learning when he put forward that “motivation in language learning
can be defined in terms of the learner’s overall goal or orientation.” Brown
(2000) decided that studies on the motivation of foreign language students
rarely refer to a distinction between two kinds of motivation namely,
instrumental motivation and integrative motivation. Gardner (1985)
considered that an integrative orientation towards foreign language learning
reflects “a sincere and personal interest in the people and culture represented
by the other group”, and an instrumental orientation emphasizes “the practical
value and advantages of learning a new language.” The integrative orientation
thus stresses an emotional involvement with other community, while the
instrumental orientation does not.
52
5. European Journal of Educational Sciences, EJES March 2019 edition Vol.6 No.1 ISSN 1857- 6036
According to Saville-Troike (2006), the integrative motivation in
foreign/second language learning was defined as the desire to be a part of
recognized or important members of the community or the society that speaks
the language. It is based on the interests in learning the language, to associate
or to socialize with the people who speak the language, and the purpose or
intention to participate or to integrate the second language using the same
language in that community. However, it sometimes involves emotion or
affective factors a great deal. On the other hand, the instrumental motivation
involves the concepts of purely practical value in learning the foreign/second
language in order to increase learners’ careers or business opportunities,
giving them more prestige and power, accessing scientific and technical
information, or just passing a course of their study in school.
In general, motivation is broadly classified into two main categories of
extrinsic motivation and intrinsic motivation. Extrinsic motivation refers to a
desire to get a reward or to avoid punishment. It emphasizes the external need
to persuade students to take part in learning activities such as homework,
grade, or doing something to please teachers (Arnold, 2000). Both integrative
and instrumental motivations are also grouped under the branch of the
extrinsic motivation (Harmer, 1991). Extrinsic motivation is based on external
outcomes such as rewards or punishments. This type of motivation could bring
a negative impact on the students. The reason is that with the extrinsic
motivation, students do not learn with their strong intention or they learn
because they are pushed by the interest in the rewards or by the punishment
they would recieve. When a student is learning because he/she is promised
rewards or wants rewards, there will be a high motivation to attend classes, to
learn, and to achieve the goal that is set. However, when these rewards are
taken away, or sometimes when there are no punishments, the student will not
be interested in coming to class to learn the language any longer.
Intrinsic motivation refers to learning having its own reward (Arnold,
2000). It means that the students are willingly and voluntarily (not
compulsorily) trying to learn what they think has worth or is important to
them. The students with intrinsic motivation will have the internal desire to
learn, and they do not have the needs for external outcomes. There are also no
negative impacts to the students who have the intrinsic motivation. In addition,
the intrinsic motivation pushes the students to learn without any rewards,
because their needs are innate, come from inside, or depend on their own will.
Lightbown and Spada (1999) mentioned that teachers do not have much
effects on students’ intrinsic motivation because the students are from
different backgrounds, and the only way to motivate students is to make the
classroom a supportive environment.
6. European Journal of Educational Sciences, EJES March 2019 edition Vol.6 No.1 ISSN 1857- 6036
The Importance of Motivation in a Foreign Language Learning
Many previous pieces of research show that motivation plays an
important role in the success or failure in learning a language in general, and
in learning a language in particular. Spolsky (1990) stated that motivated
students are likely to learn more quickly than students who are less motivated.
In a specific learning situation, students who are less motivated are likely to
lose their attention, to misbehave, and to cause discipline problems. On the
contrary, students who are more highly motivated will participate actively and
pay more attention to a certain learning task or activity.
Together with engagement, motivation is viewed in the literature as
very important for enhanced learning outcomes of all students (Woolfolk &
Margetts, 2007). Motivation is seen as a pre-requisite and a necessary element
for student engagement in learning. Student engagement in learning is not only
an end in itself, but it is also a means to the end of students achieving sound
academic outcomes (Ryan & Deci, 2009). This is important because authentic
engagement may lead to higher academic achievement throughout student life
(Zyngier, 2008). If educators want to know and resolve the young students’
issues and to make schools engaging places, then they actually have to listen
to what students are saying about their classes and teachers (Mitra & Serriere,
Factors that Affect Motivation in a Foreign Language Learning
Harmer (1991) considered the following four factors that can be
dangerous to the students’ motivation in language learning. The first factor is
the physical condition of the classroom. The physical condition means the
atmosphere in the class. For example, if the students have to study in a bad
lighting classroom, an overcrowded class with too many students, have to look
at the small board, or have to study in an unpleasant and smelly classroom,
they can lose their motivation or their motivation in learning will be lowered.
The second factor is the teaching methodology. The method of teaching which
refers to the way students are taught by teachers must affect their motivation.
Whenever the students feel bored with the teachers’ method, their motivation
would likely be lost or gradually decreased as Harmer (1991) said: “If the
students lose the confidence in the teaching method of teachers, they will
become demotivated.” The third factor that affects the motivation of the
students in a language learning is the teachers. The teachers are considered as
the most powerful variable of motivation, but they also can become a major
part in demotivating the students. Lastly, the fourth factor that affects the
motivation of students in a language learning is the success in learning. The
success refers to the appropriate level of challenge designed by the teachers.
If the difficulty of work or learning activity is too high or too low, it can lead
students to a demotivated situation in learning. As Harmer (1991) pointed out
54
7. European Journal of Educational Sciences, EJES March 2019 edition Vol.6 No.1 ISSN 1857- 6036
that giving high challenge activities may have a negative effect on motivation.
Students can also equally be demotivated by a low level of challenge.
In addition, in the Krashen’s affective filter hypothesis, the emotional
states such as tiredness, depression, boredom, etc. can obstruct the learning
process of the students. Furthermore, anxiety becomes a factor that influences
the effective filter. Low anxiety is more helpful for second language
acquisition (Krashen, 1988). This means that students' anxiety can affect their
motivation. According to Krashen, there are three effective variables that
interact with the affective filter which include: (a) Motivation which is
beneficial for language acquisition, (b) Self-confidence which is also useful
for acquisition, and (c) Anxiety which is good in the case where it is at a low
level (Krashen, 1988).
Relevant Research
There are many different pieces of research in the past related to the
motivation in a foreign/second language learning. The findings of most of
these researches were consistent with the work of Gardner and Lambert (1972)
which suggested that a person’s need for studying a foreign/second language
is for the ability to socialize with the target learning language community or
integrative motivation, and for the ability to gain knowledge and skills applied
from the target learning language or instrumental motivation.
For example, Hedge (2000) conducted a study that investigated the
motivation of 20 Japanese students who were studying English. The findings
of this study indicated that the most common reasons for studying English as
a foreign/second language was for communicating with foreigners, finding
employment in a high profile career, processing international information, and
for understanding other cultures, etc.
Siriluck and Sirithip (2004) also conducted a study about the
relationship between motivation and proficiency in English learning of
undergraduate students. The study indicated clearly that high English
proficiency students are more integratively motivated than low English
proficiency students. However, there was no significant difference in the level
of instrumental motivation between the two groups of students. Moreover, the
study also showed that high English proficiency students are more motivated
than low English proficiency students with low English achievement.
Research Methodology
The participants of the study were 371 students (first-year & second-
year undergraduate students). These students belong to the undergraduate
program of Information Technology (Faculty of Information Technology,
8. European Journal of Educational Sciences, EJES March 2019 edition Vol.6 No.1 ISSN 1857- 6036
VNU-UET). They attend the general English courses which are compulsory
courses for all students at VNU-UET.
Research Instrument
The instrument for this study is a paper & pencil questionnaire with 36
different items. The 30 main items of the questionnaire were designed using a
6-point Likert scale which was adopted from the original 7-point Likert scale
format of Gardner’s Attitude/Motivation Test Battery (AMTB). It ranged from
‘Strongly disagree’ to ‘Strongly agree’. The 30 main items are statements used
to gather information on participants’ motivation in English learning as a
foreign language (Part 1). The first 13 items demonstrate the integrative
motivation (items 1-13), and 17 items (items 14-30) present the instrumental
motivation. The other items are about the private information of the
participants (the general demographic information, the time of learning
English, the parental speaking ability, and language skills (Part 2).
Data Collection and Analysis
The questionnaires were distributed to the students during their
English class with clear instructions and explanation for filling out the
questionnaires from their English teachers. The questionnaires were then
collected upon completion. Then the information on the questionnaires was
put into an Excel file or SPPS file.
The data and information gathered from the questionnaires were
summarized and analyzed by using statistical tools such as SPSS to answer
research questions. A 6-point Likert scale was used to measure the level and
type of students’ learning motivation. The level of English learning motivation
was classified based on the following criteria in Table 1.
Table 1. Level of English learning motivation
Mean Range Level of Motivation
4.01 – 6.00 High
2.01 – 4.00 Moderate
1.00 – 2.00 Low
General Information about Participants
The questionnaire was administered in the spring of 2018. All
participants (N= 371) were the first-year and second-year students who were
enrolled in autumn of 2016 and 2017 at VNU-UET. Vietnamese is their first
language and English was introduced to them as a foreign language from
Grade 3 or Grade 5 at primary school. The participants were either in the first
year (50.1%) or in the second year of university (49.9%) (Table 2). Therefore,
56
9. European Journal of Educational Sciences, EJES March 2019 edition Vol.6 No.1 ISSN 1857- 6036
there is a very small difference between the number of students in the first year
and in the second year.
Table 2. The school year of participants
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Valid first year 186 50.1 50.1 50.1
second year 185 49.9 49.9 100.0
Total 371 100.0 100.0
Table 3 below reflects the gender of the respondents: males (58.5%) and
females (41.5%). This imbalance is due to the fact that, in general, more male
students apply to study technical programs than female students. The
information technology programs at VNU-UET usually attracts more male
students than female students.
Table 3. Gender of participants
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
Valid male 217 58.5 58.5 58.5
female 154 41.5 41.5 100.0
Total 371 100.0 100.0
Motivation
Integrative Motivation
As mentioned above, the integrative motivation in foreign/second
language learning was defined as the desire to be a part of recognized or important
members of the community or the society that speaks the language. Table 4 shows
the level of integrative motivation of the participants in the study.
Table 4. Integrative motivation
Level of
Content of item Mean S.D
motivation
1. Learning E makes me understand E-books, movies, pop music, etc. 5.15 0.402 High
2. Learning E makes me better understand and appreciate the ways of life of
4.72 0.565 High
native E speakers.
3. Learning E enables me to keep in touch with foreign friends. 4.55 0.501 High
4. By learning E I can discuss interesting topics with people from other cultural
5.03 0.377 High
5. Learning E helps me convey my knowledge & information to other people. 4.39 0.492 High
6. Learning E helps me participate freely in academic, social, and professional
5.08 0.327 High
activities among other cultural groups.
7. Learning E helps me understand and appreciate arts & literature in E speaking
4.61 0.492 High
8. Learning E helps me be more confident and comfortable. 5.01 0.431 High
9. Learning E helps me enjoy traveling to foreign countries. 5.15 0.402 High
10. Learning E helps me become an open-minded and sociable person. 4.72 0.512 High
11. Learning E helps me have more friends. 4.58 0.497 High
12. Learning E helps me integrate more easily into E speaking communities. 5.07 0.308 High
57
10. European Journal of Educational Sciences, EJES March 2019 edition Vol.6 No.1 ISSN 1857- 6036
13. Learning E enables me to communicate easily with others online. 4.30 0.490 High
Mean of Measure 4.79 0.226 High
(Note: E = English; S.D = Standard Deviation)
From Table 4, we can see that the integrative motivation of the participants in
the study is rather high with the mean for the whole measure of 4.79. The mean
for items in the measure is ranging from 4.30 to 5.15. The item 1 and 9 show
the highest mean score among the items of the measure (5.15), while item 13
show the lowest mean score among other items (4.30).
Instrumental Motivation
Once again, the instrumental motivation involves the concepts of
purely practical value in learning the foreign/second language in order to
increase learners’ careers or business opportunities, giving them more prestige
and power, accessing scientific and technical information, or just passing a
course of their study in school. Table 5 shows the level of instrumental
motivation of the participants in the study.
Table 5. Instrumental motivation
Level of
Content of item Mean S.D
motivation
14. Learning E is important because I need it for my career in the future. 5.49 0.531 High
15. Learning E is important because it will help me to learn new things. 5.45 0.529 High
16. Learning E is important because it will help me get a good job in
4.51 0.557 High
multinational corporations.
17. Learning E is important because I can get a lot of useful information for my
5.38 0.489 High
work in the future.
18. Learning E is important because it will help me have opportunities to get a
4.37 0.514 High
good job abroad.
19. Learning E is important because it will help me have a chance to study
4.41 0.523 High
20. I try my best to learn E so I can gain maximum proficiency. 5.08 0.405 High
21. I mainly focus on using E for class assignments & exams. 5.17 0.507 High
22. I am interested in reading only E-textbooks in my university study. 5.20 0.551 High
23. I am not interested in reading E-newspapers, magazines etc. 4.24 0.430 High
24. I focus more on furthering my higher education than on learning E language. 4.70 0.490 High
25. I focus more on earning a university degree than on learning E language. 5.42 0.552 High
26. I focus more on getting a good job than on learning E language. 5.42 0.577 High
27. Learning E helps me become a knowledgeable and skillful person. 5.01 0.316 High
28. Learning E helps me become an educated person. 5.08 0.280 High
29. Being proficient in E can lead to being more successful and achievable in
5.13 0.335 High
my life.
30. Being proficient in E makes other people respect me more. 5.28 0.453 High
Mean of measure 5.02 0.152 High
(Note: E = English; S.D = Standard Deviation)
58
11. European Journal of Educational Sciences, EJES March 2019 edition Vol.6 No.1 ISSN 1857- 6036
In the same pattern as integrative motivation, from Table 5, we also
can see that the instrumental motivation of the participants in the study is quite
high with the mean for the whole measure of 5.02. The mean for items in the
measure is ranging from 4.24 to 5.49. The item 14 and 15 show the highest
mean scores among the items of the measure (5.49 and 5.45, respectively),
while item 23 show the lowest mean score among other items (4.24).
From Table 4 and Table 5, we can see that there is a difference between
the mean of the integrative motivation and instrumental motivation. The mean
score of instrumental motivation is higher than the mean score of the
integrative motivation (5.02 compared to 4.79). In order to test the difference
between the mean of the integrative motivation and the instrumental
motivation, we used the Paired-Samples T-Test to compare the mean of two
paired samples (variables: the mean of the instrumental motivation –
instrmean and the mean of integrative motivation – integmean).
Table 6. Paired Samples Statistics
Std. Std. Error
Mean N Deviation Mean
Pair 1 Instrmean 5.0207 371 .15246 .01809
Integmean 4.7974 371 .22605 .02683
Table 7. Paired Samples T-Test
Paired Differences
Std. Std. 95% Confidence Interval Sig.
T df
Mean Deviatio Error of the Difference (2-tailed)
n Mean Lower Upper
Pair 1 Instrmean -
.22331 .21994 .02610 .17125 .27537 8.555 370 .000
Integmean
The Paired Samples Statistics table (Table 6) shows the mean of the
instrumental motivation = 5.0207 and the mean of the integrative motivation
= 4.7974. The Paired Samples Test table (Table 7) shows the mean = 0.22331,
t = 8.555, df = 370 and the Sig. (2-tailed) level = 0.000 ( conclude that there is an overall statistically significant difference between the
2 means of related variables (the mean of the instrumental motivation –
instrmean and the mean of the integrative motivation – integmean). From the
values of mean, we can conclude that the level of the instrumental motivation
is higher than the level of the integrative motivation in the study. This
conclusion is contradictory with the study of Alshaar organized in Kuwait
where the mean score for the integrative motivation was higher than that for
the instrumental motivation (Alshaar, 1997). In other words, the students’
integrative motivation is significantly stronger than their instrumental
motivation. However, our findings of the difference between the mean of the
59
12. European Journal of Educational Sciences, EJES March 2019 edition Vol.6 No.1 ISSN 1857- 6036
instrumental motivation and the mean of integrative motivation are consistent
with the findings of Ratanawalee’s study about motivation in English language
learning of the first-year undergraduate students at Sirindhorn International
Institute of Technology, Thammasat University, Thailand. Ratanawalee also
concluded that the mean score of instrumental motivation is higher than the
mean score of the integrative motivation (Ratanawalee, 2012).
Some Factors that Influence the Motivation in a Foreign Language
Alshaar (1997) in his study stated that female students do not have
more positive attitudes towards learning English than male students. Gardner
(1985) considered attitudes as components of motivation in language learning
and according to him, motivation refers to the combination of effort, the desire
to achieve the goal of learning the language, and favorable attitudes towards
learning the language. Therefore, do female students have higher mean scores
in motivation towards learning English than male students?
From the data gathered in the study, female students had higher mean
scores in the integrative motivation towards learning English than male
students (4.7813 versus 4.7613 respectively). In fact, the Independent–
Samples T-Test indicated that the difference was not significant (t = 1.466,
Sig. (2-tailed) = 0.148). Therefore, females do not have more integrative
motivation towards learning English than males. Although this finding is
contradictory to male students having higher mean scores in the instrumental
motivation towards learning English than female students (5.0226 versus
5.0184 respectively). In fact, the Independents-Samples T-Test indicated that
the difference was not significant (t = 0.115, Sig. (2-tailed) = 0.909).
Therefore, males do not have more instrumental motivation towards learning
English than females. We can conclude that gender has no clear effects on the
motivation in English language learning.
The Different School Year
The time which the students spent at the university would be a factor
that affects the students' motivation in English learning as a foreign language.
In order to find the influence of the time students spent at the university on
motivation, we used the Independent-Samples T-Test to test the difference in
the mean score of motivation between the first year students and the second
year students.
Analyzing the data gathered in the study, we could see that the second
year students had higher mean scores in the integrative motivation towards
learning English than the first year students (4.9099 and 4.6880 respectively).
The Independent-Samples T-Test indicated that the difference was significant
60
13. European Journal of Educational Sciences, EJES March 2019 edition Vol.6 No.1 ISSN 1857- 6036
(t = 0.4691, Sig. (2-tailed) = 0.000). Therefore, the second year students do
have more integrative motivation towards learning English than the first year
students. For the instrumental motivation, we could also see that second-year
students had higher mean scores in the instrumental motivation towards
learning English than the first year students (5.0807 and 4.9624) respectively.
The Independent-Samples T-Test also indicated that the difference was
significant (t = 0.3512, Sig. (2-tailed) = 0.001). In general, the second year
students have more motivation (both integrative and instrumental) in English
learning than the first year students. This difference is as a result of indirect
influences on students from learning environment, teaching methodology, or
the changes in attitudes toward English learning.
The Time Learning English
In order to see how the time the students have been learning English
affects their motivation in English language learning, we asked the students in
the study about the time they have been learning. The time was divided into 4
groups: 1-3 years, 4-6 years, 7-9 years, and 10 years or more. In the study, all
the students belong to group 3 (7-9 years) and group 4 (10 years or more)
respectively. This means that all the students started learning English at least
since Grade 6.
From the data collected and analyzed, the students in group 4 had
higher mean scores in the general motivation (combination between the
integrative and instrumental motivation) towards learning English than the
students in group 3 (4.9650 versus 4.9049 respectively). In fact, the
Independent-Samples T-Test indicated that the difference was not significant
(t = 1.358, Sig. (2-tailed) = 0.184). Therefore, the students with longer time in
learning English do not have more general motivation towards learning
English than the students with shorter time.
The Parental Ability in Speaking English
In this study, we wanted to know how the parental ability in speaking
English influences the students' motivation in English learning. Therefore, in
the questionnaire, the students had to provide information about their parents'
ability in speaking English.
From data collected, in the total of 371 students that participated in the
study, 61 mothers and 65 fathers can speak English. In both cases, the mother
or the father who can speak English has a positive influence on the students'
motivation in English learning. The students whose mothers can speak
English had higher mean scores of the general motivation than students who
have mothers that cannot speak English (5.0513 and 4.8245 respectively). The
Independent-Samples T-Test also indicated that the difference was significant
(t = 8.544, Sig. (2-tailed) = 0.000). In this case, the mother's ability in speaking
14. European Journal of Educational Sciences, EJES March 2019 edition Vol.6 No.1 ISSN 1857- 6036
English has a positive influence on student's motivation in English learning. It
is in the same pattern for students who have fathers that can speak English.
The students who have fathers that can speak English had higher mean scores
of the general motivation than students who have fathers that cannot speak
English (5.0003 and 4.8489 respectively). The Independent-Samples T-Test
also indicated that the difference was significant (t = 4.726, Sig. (2-tailed) =
The findings of the influence of parents' ability on students' motivation
in English learning are consistent with the research by Hamidah and her
colleagues about parental influence on students' motivation in English
learning. According to Hamidah, parents are the first teachers of a student and
they take responsibility for their education. They are also role models for
attitudes and behaviors that could assist in future success, as well as the
development of English interests and activities. Students often learn attitudes,
cultural morals, and values from their parents (Hamidah et al., 2017).
The Most Difficult Skill in English Learning
In learning English, students always try to develop all four language
skills that are important for daily communication which include: listening,
speaking, reading, and writing. In order to know the difficulties that the
students usually face related to four different language skills during the
process of learning English, we asked the students to consider which language
skill is the most difficult.
Table 7. The most difficult language skill
Language skills Frequency Percent
Speaking 188 50.7
Listening 145 39.1
Reading 23 6.2
Writing 15 4.0
Total 371 100.0
Table 7 shows the opinions of the students about the most difficult language
skill. Speaking skill was considered the most difficult language skill by the
students (50.7%). Listening skill was the second most difficult language skill
with 39.1% of students that participated in the study. This finding is
contradictory with the study of Ratanawalee where the students considered
writing as the cause of most problems (47%), and listening makes the least
problems to the students (10%) (Ratanawalee, 2012).
Furthermore, knowing the problems that students would face during
the learning process is very important. It would help the curriculum and
instruction designers, and the teachers. It would also provide guidelines to
62
15. European Journal of Educational Sciences, EJES March 2019 edition Vol.6 No.1 ISSN 1857- 6036
improve the quality of teaching and learning, and especially improve the
motivation of the students in English language learning.
Discussion and Recommendation
In general, from the study, the students are highly motivated to learn
English as a foreign language. This finding answered the research question
about the level of the students’ motivation. Within the scope of the study, it
only focused on two types of motivation: integrative and instrumental. Based
on the comparison and assessment, we found that the students in the study are
more instrumentally motivated to learn English than integrative motivation.
The students’ tendency towards the instrumental motivation could be
explained by the focus of the students on getting a good job that needs
proficiency in English or getting a certificate of English to pass through the
VNU-UET foreign language requirements.
Within the factors studied (gender, the school year, the time learning
English, and the parental ability in speaking English) that might influence the
students’ motivation in English language learning, only the different school
year and the parental ability in speaking English have significant influences
on the students' motivation. Specifically, the second year students have greater
motivation in English language learning than the first year students. The
second-year students have spent more time in the university learning
environment than the first year students. This has led to the changes in
attitudes towards English learning. This is the reason for explaining the
difference of motivation in English language learning. The students who have
parents that can speak English also have a higher level of motivation in English
language learning. The importance of parents on attitudes, motivation, and
behaviors in learning, in general, is consistent with many previous studies.
Speaking and listening skills were the most troublesome to the students
that participated in the study. These two language skills are very important to
communicate with other people, therefore more attention should be given to
building the training programs, curriculums, teaching methodology, and the
study resources to improve these language skills.
Based on the findings of this study, the results are unique for only
particular students that participated in the study. The students have a high level
of motivation in both instrumental and integrative aspects, whereas,
instrumental motivation is significantly higher than the integrative motivation.
Furthermore, the study with other students in different universities with
largely different education context would produce significantly different
results. Therefore, future studies should include more different universities to
improve the quality of the study.
The data of the study was collected from only 371 students of the first-
year and the second-year within a strict time limit. It is recommended that a
16. European Journal of Educational Sciences, EJES March 2019 edition Vol.6 No.1 ISSN 1857- 6036
larger sample size with a longer time frame should be extended to increase the
degree of generalization of the study, in order to make the findings more valid
and reliable. This study, however, does not examine motivation in English
language learning of students in the third and fourth year. It is recommended
that more variety of participants should be included.
In summary, this study was conducted to provide some insights into
the level and type of motivation in English language learning with the
participants of the first and second-year students at VNU-UET. The study
provides useful knowledge and information about motivation and factors that
influences the students’ motivation in English learning. These value
knowledge and information would help to improve the students’ motivation,
and ultimately improve the students’ proficiency in English.
1. Alshaar, B. E. (1997). Attitudes and motivation of second language
learners in Kuwait. Retrospective Theses and Dissertations. 277..
2. Arnold, J. (2000). Affect in language learning. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
3. Brown, H. (2000). Principles of language learning and teaching. New
Jersey: Prentice Hall.
4. Dörnyei, Z. (2001). Motivational strategies in the language classroom.
Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
5. Ellis, R. (1986). Understanding second language acquisition. Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
6. Ellis, R. (1994). The study of second language acquisition. Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
7. Gardner, R.C. & Lambert, W.E. (1972). Attitude and Motivation in
Second Language Learning. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
8. Gardner, R. C. (1983). Learning another language: a true social
psychological experiment. Journal of language and social psychology,
2, 219 -240.
9. Gardner, R.C. (1985). Social psychology and second language
learning: The role of attitudes and motivation. London: Edward
Arnold Publishers.
10. Gardner, R. C. (2006). The socio-educational mole of second language
learning. Rowley, Massachusetts: Newbury House.
11. Hamidah, A. R., Azizah, R., Shah, R. A. W., Faizah, M. N., Wan, Z.
W. Z., & Mohd, A. B. (2017). Factors affecting motivation in
language, Learning International Journal of Information and
Education Technology, Vol. 7, No. 7.
12. Harmer, J. (1991). The practice of English language teaching. London:
Longman.
64
17. European Journal of Educational Sciences, EJES March 2019 edition Vol.6 No.1 ISSN 1857- 6036
13. Krashen, S. (1988). Second language acquisition and second language
learning. London: Prentice Hall International (UK).
14. Lightbown, P.M. & Spada, N. (1999). How languages are learned?
Oxford: Oxford University.
15. MacDonough, S. (1983). Psychology in foreign language learning.
George, Allen& Unwin: London.
16. Midraji, S. (2003). Effective factors and ESL. Learning. In C. Coombe,
P. Davidson, & D. Lloyd (Eds.). Proceedings of the 5th and 6th current
trends in English language testing (pp. 19-32). Dubai, U.A.E: TESOL
Arabia.
17. Mitra, D. L. & Serriere, S. C. (2012). Student Voice in Elementary
School Reform Examining Youth Development in Fifth Graders.
American Educational Research Journal, 49(4), 743-774.
18. Parsons, R., Hinson, S., & Brown, D. (2001). Educational psychology:
practitioner - researcher models of teaching. University of Virginia:
Wadsworth Thomson Learning.
19. Ratanawalee, W. (2012). A survey study of motivation in English
language learning of first-year undergraduate students at Sirindhorn
International Institute of Technology (SIIT), Thammasat University,
Thailand.
20. Ryan, R. M. & Deci, E. L. (2009). Promoting self-determined school
engagement: Motivation, learning, and well-being. In K. R. Wentzel
& A. Wigfield (Eds.), Handbook of motivation at school. (pp. 171-
196). New York: Routledge
21. Saville-Troike, M. (2006). Introducing second language acquisition.
New York: Cambridge University Press.
22. Siriluck, W. & Sirithip, P. (2002). Integrative motivation, instrumental
motivation, and English achievement among students in the Faculty of
Arts. Unpublished master’s thesis, School of Language and
Communication. National Institute of Development Administration.
23. Spolsky, B. (1990). Conditions for second language learning. Hong
Kong: Oxford University Press.
24. Woolfolk, A. & Margetts, K. (2007). Educational psychology. NSW,
Australia: Pearson. Prentice Hall.
25. Zyngier, D. (2008). (Re)conceptualizing student engagement: Doing
education not doing time. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24,
1765-1776