석사학위논문

Uzbek EFL Learners’ Motivation towards English

Language Learning

동아대학교 대학원

영어영문학과

샤흘로 아자마토바

2021 학 년 도
Uzbek EFL Learners’ Motivation toward English
Language Learning

by
SHAKHLO AZAMATOVA

Submitted to

The Graduate School of Dong-A University in Partial Fulfillment of the

Requirements for the Degree of Master in the English Linguistics

December 2021
 Uzbek EFL Learners’ Motivation towards English
Language Learning

by SHAKHLO AZAMATOVA
I have examined the final copy of this dissertation for format and content and
recommend that it be accepted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the
degree of Master of Arts in English Language and Literature.

Committee Chair Dr. Hyunjeong Nam

We have read this thesis and recommend

its acceptance:

Committee Vice-chair Dr. Jeongyeon Park

Committee Member Dr. Kyu-Hong Hwang

Abstract

Uzbek EFL Learners’ Motivation towards English

Language Learning
by

Shakhlo Azamatova

Dept. of English Language and Literature

Graduate school, Dong-A University
Busan, Korea

This study investigated the English language learning motivation

levels and the main motivation type (integrative motivation or instrumental
motivation) of students in a secondary school in Uzbekistan. It also aimed to
discover if there were differences in motivation towards English language
learning between lower and upper secondary students. A mixed-methods
approach was used in this research, which employed a questionnaire and a
semi-structured interview. The questionnaire was distributed to 336
participants who were lower secondary and upper secondary students in a
secondary school in Uzbekistan. Thereafter, 16 participants were
interviewed. The findings revealed that the level of the lower secondary and
upper secondary students’ motivation was high. Instrumental motivation
was the most common motivation for the lower secondary and upper

i
secondary students of English language learning. There was no significant
difference between the lower secondary and upper secondary students’
motivation. The support which lower and upper secondary students wanted
were categorized into six kinds: teachers, the school, self, peers, parents,
and the government.

Key words: integrative motivation, instrumental motivation, English

language learning, Uzbek EFL learners

ii
 Table of Contents

Ⅰ. Introduction..........................................................................................................1
1.The Purpose of the Study..................................................................................2
2. Research Questions..........................................................................................3
3. Organization of the Study................................................................................3
Ⅱ. Literature Review................................................................................................4
1. Definition of Motivation and Related Terms...................................................4
2. Types of Motivation.........................................................................................4
2.1 Intrinsic Motivation vs. Extrinsic Motivation............................................4
2.2. Integrative Motivation vs. Instrumental Motivation.....................................5
2.3 Self-Determination Theory............................................................................6
2.4. The Ideal Self................................................................................................7
3. Related Research..............................................................................................8
3.1 Integrative Motivation vs. Instrumental Motivation.......................................8
3.2 Motivation vs. Age and Education Level.......................................................9
3.3 Motivation vs. Language Achievement........................................................10
Ⅲ. Research Methodology......................................................................................13
1. Participants................................................................................................13
2. Procedure and Materials................................................................................15
3. Analysis.....................................................................................................18
Ⅳ. Results..............................................................................................................20
1. Results of Research Question 1......................................................................20
2. Results of Research Question 2......................................................................21
3. Results of Research Question 3......................................................................23
Ⅴ. Discussion.........................................................................................................35
1. Integrative Motivation vs. Instrumental Motivation.......................................35
2. Motivation vs. Educational Level..................................................................35

iii
 3. Support for Increasing Students’ Motivation.................................................36
VI. Conclusion.......................................................................................................37
References.............................................................................................................38
Appendices............................................................................................................44
Abstract(Korean)…………………………………………………………..54

iv
 List of Tables

Table 1. Information of interviewees...........................................................14

Table 2 Questionnaire Distribution..............................................................16
Table 3 Questionnaire Modifications...........................................................17
Table 4 Interpretation of Mean Scores of Motivational Levels...................18
Table 5 Descriptive Statistics of Motivation Level......................................21
Table 6 Descriptive Statistics of Motivation Levels from Lower and Upper
Secondary School Students..............................................................22
Table 7 Independent Samples t-test of Lower Secondary and Upper
Secondary School Students..............................................................23

v
Table 8 Distribution of the Open-ended Question.......................................24

Ⅰ. Introduction

The English language is becoming more and more important as the

global language that is used to communicate in various sectors. New
technology and the adoption of the Internet have resulted in a major
transition in business, education, science, and technology, all of which
demand high proficiency in English. Therefore, individuals will have more
opportunities if their English proficiency is high. Nowadays, a large number
of people realize the importance of English and have begun to study
English.
In order to improve students’ English learning, educators pay attention
to motivation. According to Dörnyei (1998), motivation not only provides
the primary impetus to initiate second or foreign language learning but also
supplies the impetus to persevere in the long and often tedious learning
process. Even people with remarkable ability cannot accomplish long-term
goals without sufficient motivation. Therefore, motivation is very important
for English language learning.
The theories about motivation attempt to explain why humans behave
and think as they do. Motivation is also of great importance in language
education. In the light of many definitions, motivation can be considered a
tool for the success of English language learning. Mowrer (1950), a pioneer
in the study of first language acquisition, was of the view that a child learns
his first language in order to communicate with his family and the rest of
society. Gardner (1982) was influenced by Mowrer’s idea. Gardner
presented Mowrer’s idea as the basis for his research. Gardner’s model

1
tends to reflect the four basic features of L2 learning: social and cultural
environment; learner’s individual differences; the setting in which learning
takes place; and linguistic outcomes. On the basis of these elements, learner
motivation can be categorized into two types: integrative motivation and
instrumental motivation.
Several studies in the area of teaching foreign languages have noted
that motivation is one of the factors that affects achievement in learning a
foreign language (Downing & Yu, 2012; Gardner & Lambert, 1972;
Gardner, Lalonde, & Moorcroft, 1985). Motivation is responsible for why
people initially decide to do something, how long they are willing to sustain
the activity, and how hard they work while pursuing it (Dörnyei, 2001a). It
is believed that without sufficient motivation no other factor on its own can
ensure student achievement (Dörnyei, 2001b).

1.The Purpose of the Study

It is widely understood that many Uzbek students struggle with

learning English. Some students cannot maintain their interest in English
learning. Some students cannot see the point of learning English. In
addition, some students cannot pass the required English exams. In order to
assist these struggling students, it is critical to understand the factors which
affect their English learning motivation and try to identify the types of
support they need to increase their motivation in learning English.
This research provides a description and analysis of the two main
types of motivation (instrumental or integrative) and data about the levels of
English learning motivation found among students in an Uzbeki school. It
reveals what support students feel they need to increase their motivation. By

2
understanding what students want and need to increase their motivation to
learn English and we can give them appropriate support to help them reach
their goal of learning English so they can participate in the global discussion
and make their mark on the world.

2. Research Questions

With this in mind, the current study's goal is to provide answers to

the following research questions.

1. What are the levels and main types (integrative or instrumental) of

lower and upper secondary students’ motivation for English language
learning?
2. What are the differences between lower secondary and upper
secondary students’ motivation?
3. What support do students of lower secondary and upper secondary
school feel they need to increase their level of motivation towards
English language learning?

3. Organization of the Study

This study is divided into six parts. Chapter 1 describes the project
and outlines the purpose of the study through three research questions.
Chapter 2 presents the theoretical background of motivation towards
language learning. It also presents a discussion of some challenging issues
in solving the problem of motivation and its integral role in learning new
languages. In the next chapter, Chapter 3, the methodology of the research,
its subjects, and instrumentation will be presented. Chapter 4 includes the
results of the data analysis. Chapter 5 provides a discussion of the findings

3
of the study and Chapter 6 concludes the study with recommendations for
English educators based on the study’s findings.

Ⅱ. Literature Review

1. Definition of Motivation and Related Terms

Motivation is one of the most important factors in foreign language

learning success and it has been extensively investigated (Gardner et al.,
1997). Gardner (1985b) stated that language learning motivation is “the
extent to which the individual works or strives to learn the language because
of a desire to do so and the satisfaction experienced in the activity” (p. 10).
According to Gardner (1985b), in order to understand why language
learners were motivated, it is essential to understand the learners’ ultimate
goal or purpose for learning the language. Ryan and Deci (2000, p. 54)
stated that “to be motivated means to be moved to do something”. Unlike
unmotivated people who have lost the impetus and inspiration to act,
motivated people are energized until the end of a task. Motivation is
responsible for: why people decide to do something, how long they are
willing to sustain the activity, and how hard they are going to pursue it
(Dörnyei, 2001b, p. 8). According to Dörnyei (2001a), the cognitive
approach is characterized by the current trend in motivational psychology
and psychology in general, which focuses on how an individual's conscious
attitudes, thoughts, beliefs, and interpretation of events influence their
behavior, or how mental processes are transformed into action.

4
2. Types of Motivation

2.1 Intrinsic Motivation vs. Extrinsic Motivation

This classification comes from the cognitive views which “stress

that human behavior is influenced by the way people think about themselves
and their environment” (Biehler & Snowman, 1974, p. 402). Intrinsic
motivation exists when students actively seek out and participate in
activities without needing to be rewarded with resources or activities that
are not related to the learning goal. Intrinsic motivation refers to
undertakings that are enjoyable in and of themselves, such as the enjoyment
of solving a puzzle, learning a new pastime, or playing a game; the
motivating elements for doing so are internal, rather than external.On the
other hand, Extrinsic motivation refers to engaging in a task as a result of
external factors. As Dörnyei (1994) explains, “extrinsic motivation refers to
behaviors that ‘the individual performs to receive some extrinsic reward’
such as getting good grades, being praised by a teacher or to avoid
punishment” (p. 275).

2.2. Integrative Motivation vs. Instrumental Motivation

Two kinds of motivation were introduced by Gardner and Lambert

(1959) to measure motivation: integrative and instrumental motivation. The
integrative orientation deals with the student’s motivation to learn a
language for reasons such as an interest in foreign languages, a desire for
interaction with the target language community, and attitudes toward the
target language community (Gardner & Lamber, 1972). The integrative
orientation is the most often researched concept in SLA motivational

5
literature and researchers have concluded that “integrativeness appears to be
the single most important factor” of L2 acquisition (Dörnyei & Csizér 2005,
p. 19) as studies and research show “that learners ranking high on
integrative orientation work harder and learn faster than those who are low
on integrative motivation.”
Instrumental orientation deals with the practical advantages of
learning an L2. As Brown (2000) pointed out, the instrumental side of the
integrative-instrumental dichotomy refers to “acquiring a language as a
means for attaining instrumental goals: furthering a career, reading technical
material, translation, and so forth.” (p. 162). Integrative motivation refers to
a desire to become more like valued members of the target language
community (Gardner & Lambert, 1959 cited in Ramage, 1990).
Instrumental motivation refers to a determination to acquire another
language to achieve such goals as getting a good job or achieving social
recognition (Clement, Gardner & Smith, 1977, p. 124 cited in Ramage,
1990). Samimy and Tabuse (1992) conducted research on motivation and
gave similar definitions for these two terms. They defined integrative
motivation as the learners’ desire for cultural broadening, and instrumental
motivation as the learners’ belief in the importance of foreign language
study. There are many key factors that play an important role in motivating
students in learning a foreign language.

2.3 Self-Determination Theory

Self-Determination Theory (SDT) highlights the importance of “a

human’s evolved inner resources of personality development and behavioral
self-regulation” (Deci & Ryan, 2000). Within this construct, two

6
motivational types are at play: extrinsic and intrinsic motivation (Dornyei,
2003; Noels, Clément, & Pelletier, 2003). SDT views these factors as lying
along a continuum of self-determination where, through the process of self-
regulation, extrinsic contingencies are progressively transformed into
intrinsic (self-determined) values and motivations (Noels et al., 2003).
Extrinsic motivation, according to self-determination theory, can be broken
down into four constructs: external regulation, introjected regulation,
identified regulation, and integrated regulation. Self-determination theory
focuses on competence, relationships/relatedness, and autonomy, which
appear to enhance intrinsic motivation (Deci & Ryan, 2000).

2.4. The Ideal Self

The Ideal Self, a concept proposed by Dörnyei (2005; 2009) to

reframe motivation in the context of modern concepts of self and identity,
has recently been included in motivational theories. According to Dörnyei’s
Motivational Self-system, motivation comes about from the student’s desire
to lessen the gap between their actual self and their ought-to self (Kormos &
Csizer, 2008). The theory is broken down into three components (Dörnyei
& Csizér, 2005; Dörnyei, 2005; Kormos & Csizér, 2008):
1) The ideal L2 self: The representation of all the attributes that a
person would like to possess (e.g., hopes, aspiration, desires).
2) Ought-to L2 self: The attributes that one believes one ought to
possess to avoid possible negative outcomes, and which therefore
may bear little resemblance to the person’s own desires or wishes
(Dornyei, 2005).
3) L2 Learning experience: The attributes that are concerned with

7
 executive motives related to the immediate learning environment
and experience (Dörnyei, 2005).
There are several kinds of motivational theories, but this study only focuses
on integrative and instrumental motivation, which was introduced by
Gardner and Lambert (1959)

3. Related Research

3.1 Integrative Motivation vs. Instrumental Motivation

There has been a great deal of research focusing on the levels and
types of motivations (including, integrative motivation and instrumental
motivation). Most of the research found that students’ instrumental
motivation is higher than integrative motivation. For example, Al-Tamimi
and Shuib (2009) conducted a research study investigating students’
motivation in terms of three motivational constructs: integrative motivation,
instrumental motivation, and personal motivation, based on Gardner’s
(1985a) and Cooper and Fishman’s (1977) work. The findings showed that
the subjects’ greater support of instrumental reasons for learning the English
language included utilitarian and academic reasons. Personal reasons were
also regarded as important motives by the students. It also showed that a
large number of students found interest in the culture of the English-
speaking world as represented by English-language films. Kyriacou and
Zhu (2008) explored the perception of high school students regarding their
motivation towards learning English and their perceived influence on
others, and the findings indicated that these students’ English learning
motivation is dominated by life and career-based reasons rather than

8
integrative reasons. Moiinvaziri (2008) took 255 university students of
Sirjan as participants and used a questionnaire based on Gardner’s
Attitude/Motivation Test Battery (AMTB) as the instrument. The findings
showed that students were highly motivated in both instrumental and
integrative orientations. Tahaineh (2013) did research on the motivational
orientations (instrumental and integrative) of Jordanian EFL female
undergraduates and their attitude towards learning the target language and
joining its community. The participants were 184 students majoring in
English language and literature at Al Balqa' Applied University-Princess
Alia University College-Amman, Jordan. Using the Attitude/Motivation
Test Battery, the researcher discovered that the subjects' greater support of
instrumental reasons for learning the English language included utilitarian
and academic reasons, and it also provided evidence that learning English as
a part of its people's culture had the least impact on students' English
language motivation, whereas their attitudes towards the target language
community and its members were generally found to be highly positive.

3.2 Motivation vs. Age and Education Level

Many studies show that students from lower education levels are
more motivated than the students with higher education levels, and that
younger learners are more motivated than older learners. In their study,
Sung and Padilla (1998) discovered that elementary students were more
motivated than secondary students to learn Chinese, Japanese, and Korean.
Baker and MacIntyre (2000) also reported that in their study, younger
learners were more motivated than older learners. Age was found to be a

9
factor influencing college Chinese learners in Sung's (2010) study, with
younger learners being more positive toward Chinese language learning due
to friends' opinions about the classes and professors at school and the desire
to study in a Chinese-speaking country. Williams et al. (2002) revealed that
seventh graders scored significantly higher on the need for the French
language, integrative orientation, positive attitude toward their teachers, and
perceived self-ability and success than ninth graders. On the other hand, a
few studies on age and L2 motivation reported contradictory results.
Kormos and Csizér (2008) compared three age groups of Hungarian English
learners and found that the youngest group, secondary school students, was
less motivated than university students and adult learners. Wong (2008)
investigated the motivation towards English language learning of Chinese
immigrant students who were 13 to 22 years old. The participants were 109
secondary school Chinese immigrant students who came from Guangdong
province. She found that Chinese immigrant students who were less than 15
years old had a lower mean score on motivation than those who were more
than 16 years old. Chinese immigrant English learners in Hong Kong over
the age of 20 were found to be more motivated to learn English than those
under the age of 15.

3.3 Motivation vs. Language Achievement

Many studies on the relationship between learners’ integrative

motivation, instrumental motivation, and English proficiency or English
academic achievement have been conducted, the results show that there was
a positive relationship between learners’ integrative motivation,

10
instrumental motivation, and English proficiency or English academic
achievement. For instance, Gardner and Lambert (1972) conducted a study
on the relationship between motivation and foreign language achievement
with high school students taking French as a foreign language in
Connecticut. A motivation questionnaire and French achievement tests were
administered to 142 students. It was found that there was a positive
relationship between integrative motivation and the students’ grades in
French. Gardner et al. (1985) studied the relationship between integrative
motivation and achievement in a foreign language (French) course. A total
of 170 students responded to questionnaires adapted from the Attitudes and
Motivation Test Battery (AMTB). Gardner et al. (1985) found a positive
relationship between integrative motivation and students’ French language
achievement (French grades). Gardner and Masgoret (2003) investigated the
relationship of second language achievement to five attitude/motivation
variables from Gardner's Socio-educational model: integrativeness, attitudes
toward the learning situation, motivation, integrative orientation, and
instrumental orientation in a meta-analysis of over 10,000 participants. Two
of the study's major findings were that the five classes of variables are all
positively related to second language achievement and that motivation is
more strongly related to second language achievement than the other four
variables. Choosri and Intharaksa (2011) investigated the relationship
between integrative and instrumental motivation and the foreign language
achievement of Thai technical students enrolled in English courses. The
study findings revealed that students had high levels of motivation – both
integrative and instrumental – to learn English, though their instrumental
motivation outperformed their integrative motivation slightly. The study
also found a significant difference (P-Value = 0.007) at the 0.01 level

11
between the learning motivation of students with high academic
achievement (GPA 3.20) and that of other peers (GPA 3.20). Ghanea et al.
(2011) examined the relationship between learners’ integrative motivation,
instrumental motivation, and English proficiency among Iranian learners.
They found that there was a significant relationship between integrative
motivation and instrumental motivation with English proficiency among
EFL learners of Shiraz Azad University. Liu (2007) conducted research on
Chinese students’ motivation to learn English at the tertiary level. The study
found that students had positive attitudes toward learning English and were
highly motivated to study it, that students were motivated to learn English
more instrumentally than integratively, and that students' attitudes and
motivation were positively correlated with their English proficiency.
Kitjaroonchai and Kitjaroonchai (2012) conducted research about the types
of motivation (integrative or instrumental) that Thai English majors at Asia-
Pacific International University have toward English learning and the
correlation between the students’ learning motivation and their academic
achievement (GPA). The findings revealed that the students had high levels
of integrative and instrumental motivation to learn English. Their
instrumental motivation was found to be slightly higher than their
integrative motivation. It also demonstrated that there was a significant
positive relationship between students’ learning motivation and their
academic achievement (GPA). Oranpattanachai (2013) did research about
the motivation of Thai undergraduate students in an English language
classroom. The participants consisted of 420 first-year Thai engineering
students from a public university. The data were collected through a
questionnaire. The findings showed that students took English courses for
both integrative and instrumental motivation as well as to fulfill the

12
university English language requirement. The majority of students reported
that instrumental reasons for studying English were more important than
integrative reasons. Integrative motivation significantly contributed to the
students’ strength of motivation. Students’ predominant reason for taking
English, to fulfill the university foreign language requirement, was a
significant predictor of their English course grades, and integrative
motivation and instrumental motivation were the significant predictors of
the students’ desire to continue studying English beyond their fulfillment of
the university English language requirement.

Ⅲ. Research Methodology

The purpose of this study was to investigate the impact of

motivation on English language learning. To do so, motivation levels and
types of motivation were analyzed and data were collected to find out if
there were differences between the motivation levels towards English
language learning of lower secondary school students and upper secondary
school students in a secondary school in Uzbekistan. Moreover, the study
aimed to find out the types of support that students felt were important to
increase their motivation towards English language learning. To achieve
these purposes, an explanatory sequential mixed-methods design was used
to conduct this study. The explanatory sequential mixed methods design
consisted of first collecting quantitative data and then collecting qualitative
data to help explain or elaborate on the quantitative results (Creswell &
Plano Clark, 2011).
In this research, firstly, the levels of students’ motivation were

13
assessed, and then students were chosen from different motivation levels to
interview in an attempt to discover what support they felt they needed to
increase their motivation towards English language learning.

1. Participants

The subjects are students of a secondary school located in central

Uzbekistan. There are two types of participants: surveyed participants and
interviewed participants. The total number of participants are 336
participants. Out of these participants, 168 are from lower secondary, and
168 participants are from upper secondary. The participants of this research
consist of 213 (63.3 %) male learners and 123 female learners, who form
36.6% of the subjects.
Sixteen participants were chosen to be interviewed according to their
motivation levels and answers to open-ended questions. Since there were no
subjects in the very low motivation level, learners were chosen who were in
the very high, high, average, and low motivation levels (four participants
from each level) to find out what support they need to help them become
motivated. The interview participants’ information is presented in Table 1.

Table 1. Information of interviewees

INTERVIEWEES GENDER MOTIVATION EDUCATION
LEVEL LEVEL
STUDENT 1 FEMALE VERY HIGH UPPER
SECONDARY
STUDENT 2 FEMALE VERY HIGH UPPER
SECONDARY
STUDENT 3 MALE VERY HIGH LOWER

14
 SECONDARY
STUDENT 4 MALE VERY HIGH LOWER
SECONDARY
STUDENT 5 MALE HIGH UPPER
SECONDARY
STUDENT 6 MALE HIGH UPPER
SECONDARY
STUDENT 7 MALE HIGH LOWER
SECONDARY
STUDENT 8 FEMALE HIGH LOWER
SECONDARY
STUDENT 9 MALE AVERAGE UPPER
SECONDARY
STUDENT 10 FEMALE AVERAGE UPPER
SECONDARY
STUDENT 11 MALE AVERAGE LOWER
SECONDARY
STUDENT 12 MALE AVERAGE LOWER
SECONDARY
STUDENT 13 FEMALE LOW UPPER
SECONDARY
STUDENT 14 MALE LOW LOWER
SECONDARY
STUDENT 15 MALE LOW LOWER
SECONDARY
STUDENT 16 MALE LOW LOWER
SECONDARY

15
2. Procedure and Materials

Due to the distance between the researcher and the participants, the
study was conducted via the internet using a Google Forms survey. The
participants were asked to fill in the questionnaires using a five-point
Likert-scale. The questionnaire consisted of 30 items with a five-point
Likert scale (on a scale of 1-5, ranging from strongly disagree = 1 to
strongly agree = 5). Items 1- 15 were questions about integrative
motivation, and items 16-30 were questions about instrumental motivation.
The questionnaire was adapted from two researchers: (1) Gardner’s
(1985a) Attitude Motivation Test Battery (AMTB) using the integrative and
instrumental orientation scales; and (2) Liu (2007). To better accomodate
the learning situation in Uzbekistan, further modifications were made as
follows.
First, eight statements were chosen from Gardner and combined with
22 statements from Liu (2007). In Liu’s original questionnaire, there were
44 statements (8 Attitude, 6 Travel Orientation, 14 Integrative, and 16
Instrumental). Those statements of integrative and instrumental motivation
were made redundant by Gardner’s questionnaire, so only twenty-two
statements from Liu (2007) were adapted. Table 2 summarizes the
questionnaire items.

Table 2 Questionnaire Distribution

Item Garner’s (AMTB) Liu (2007).
(1985a)
Integrative motivation 4, 8, 9, 12 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 10, 11,
(1-15) 13, 14, 15

16
 Instrumental motivation 17, 23, 26, 28 16, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22,
(16-30) 24, 25, 27, 29, 30

Second, after combining the two questionnaires, the items were given a
standardized format of “Studying English is important because…” so that
students could easily understand the items and complete the questionnaire
quickly. Keywords also were also modified in the questionnaire statements
to match the current situation of global English; for example, Item 5 from
Liu (2007, pp. 144): “The British are open-minded and modern people.”
This statement was modified as: “Studying English is important because it
will allow me to know more native speakers of English who are open-
minded and modern people.” Table 3 shows the modification examples.

Table 3 Questionnaire Modifications

MOTIVATIONAL STATEMENT

ORIGINAL STATEMENTS NEW STATEMENTS

1. Studying English can be 1. Studying English is important
important for me because I because I would like to meet
would like to meet foreigners foreigners with whom I can speak
with whom I can speak English. English.

2. Studying English can be 2. Studying English is important

important for me because it because it will enable me to better
will enable me to better understand and appreciate art and
understand and appreciate literature in the English language.
English art and literature.

5. The British are open-minded and 5. Studying English is important

modern people. because it will allow me to know

17
 more native speakers of English
who are open-minded and modern
people.

14. I would like to know more British 14. Studying English is important
people. because I would like to know more
native speakers of English.

The final questionnaire format consisted of the following parts (see

Appendix B).

Part I: General information about the respondents: gender, age, level of

education, email address (The data in this part were collected only for
communication about the possible future interviews).
Part II: Integrative motivational items (1-15), and instrumental motivational
items (16-30). The statements were only positive in meaning.
Part III: An open-ended question on what support students felt important to
increase their levels of motivation towards English language learning.

3. Analysis

The data set in this study consisted of quantitative and qualitative

data. For the quantitative data, a statistical package version was utilized. For
the qualitative data, a coding technique was used. The details of the data
analysis are presented based on the research questions which follow:
Research Question 1: What are the levels and main type (integrative
or instrumental) of lower and upper secondary students’ motivation for
English language learning? To answer this research question, descriptive
statistics (means and standard 30 deviations) were computed from the
student participants’ responses to the questions regarding integrative
motivation and instrumental motivation. To interpret the mean scores for

18
students’ motivational level, the interpretive procedure designed by Best
(1981) and Degang (2010) was adapted, as shown in Table 4.

Table 4 Interpretation of Mean Scores of Motivational Levels

Level Range of score

Very high 4.50 – 5.00

High 3.50 – 4.49
Average 2.50 – 3.49
Low 1.50 – 2.49
Very low 1.00 –1.49

The mean score for each item indicates the level of students’
motivation; a higher score indicates that students had higher motivation
while a lower score indicates lower motivation.
For the qualitative data, open coding and axial coding techniques
were utilized. Open coding codes or labels words and phrases found in the
transcript or text. Axial coding creates themes or categories by grouping
codes or labels given to words and phrases (Strauss & Corbin, 1990). To
illustrate the data coding process, one participant was used as an example:
“I would like native speakers to teach English, because they have good
pronunciation.” This statement was coded as “native speaker.” After that,
this code was categorized with other similar codes into the category of
“teacher.”

19
20
 Ⅳ. Results

In this study, the quantitative results are presented in three sections,

according to the three research questions. First, the descriptive statistics of
students’ cumulative motivation levels, integrative motivation levels, and
instrumental motivation levels are presented to show the levels and main
types of the lower secondary and upper secondary students’ motivation for
English language learning. Second, an independent sample t-test is
presented to highlight the important differences between lower secondary
and upper secondary students’ motivation. Last, the coding pattern from the
open-ended questionnaire and interviews are presented to show the types of
support students from lower secondary and upper secondary felt were
important for increasing their levels of motivation towards English language
learning.

1. Results of Research Question 1

Research Question 1: What are the levels and main types (integrative
or instrumental) of lower and upper secondary students’ motivation for
English language learning? To answer this question, descriptive statistics
(Means and Standard Deviation) from both lower and upper secondary were
computed from the student participants’ responses to the questions about
integrative motivation and instrumental motivation. The descriptive
statistics of the integrative motivation levels, instrumental motivation levels,
and students’ cumulative motivation levels, are presented in Table 5.

21
Table 5 Descriptive Statistics of Motivation Levels

N M SD Motivational Level

Integrative motivation 332 4.20 .60 high

Instrumental motivation 332 4.30 .58 high

Overall 332 4.25 .56 high

The descriptive statistics in Table 5 show the mean score, standard

deviation, integrative motivation, instrumental motivation, and total
motivation levels. As indicated in Table 5, the total motivation
measurement is found to be at a high level (M = 4.25, SD = .56). When
examining each type of motivation, both integrative and instrumental
motivation are also measured to be at a high level (M = 4.20 – 4.30, SD
= .58 -.60). The mean score of instrumental motivation is a little higher than
integrative motivation.

2. Results of Research Question 2

Research Question 2: Are there any differences between lower and

upper secondary students’ motivation? To answer this question, an
independent sample t-test was used to determine whether there was a
significant difference between lower secondary and upper secondary
students’ motivation. The results are shown in Tables 6 and 7.

22
Table 6 Descriptive Statistics of Motivation Levels from Lower and Upper
Secondary School Students

Level N M SD

Integrative Lover secondary 166 4.16 .64

motivation Upper secondary 166 4.21 .55

Instrumental Lover secondary 166 4.24 .63

motivation Upper secondary 166 4.36 .53

Overall Lover secondary 166 4.20 .62

Upper secondary 166 4.29 .51

The descriptive statistics in Table 6 show the mean scores and

standard deviations of integrative motivation, instrumental motivation, and
the total motivation of lower secondary and upper secondary students.
Overall, the mean scores of upper secondary school students in all types of
motivation are a little higher than lower secondary school students (M =
4.16–4.30, SD = .51–.64). As indicated in Table 6, the instrumental
motivation scores of both levels are higher than integrative motivation (M =
4.16–4.30, SD = .51–.64.) This means instrumental motivation is the
primary type of motivation towards learning English

23
 Table 7 Independent Samples t-test of Lower Secondary and Upper
Secondary School Students

F Sig. T df Sig.

Integrative 1.06 .30 -.77 330 .44

Instrumental 2.16 .14 -1.86 330 .07

Overall 2.46 .12 -1.36 330 .18

*p < .05

An independent-samples t-test was conducted to compare the

motivation levels (integrative and instrumental) of lower secondary and
upper secondary school students. There was no significant difference in the
integrative motivation scores for lower secondary school students (M =
4.16, SD = .64) and upper secondary school students (M = 4.21, SD = .55; t
(330) = -.77, p = .44). There was no significant difference in the
instrumental motivation scores for lower secondary school students (M
=4.24, SD = .63) and upper secondary school students (M =4.36, SD = .53; t
(330) = -1.86, p =.07). The results suggest that there was no significant
difference between lower secondary and upper secondary students’
motivation towards learning English.

3. Results of Research Question 3

Research Question 3: What support do students of lower secondary and

upper secondary feel important to increasing the levels of their motivation

24
towards English language learning? To answer this research question, the
data were obtained from the open-ended questionnaire and an interview
with selected subjects. An open-ended questionnaire was completed by the
134 participants. Table 8 presents the distribution of the students’ self-
reported motivation levels from both lower and upper secondary school
students.

Table 8 Distribution of the Open-ended Question

Motivation level Very high High Average Low Very low Total
number

Lower secondary 22 52 6 1 0 81

Upper secondary 23 28 2 0 0 53

Overall 45 80 8 1 0 134

After coding the open-ended question, six kinds of support were

found, ranging from most to least reported: teacher, school, self, peer,
parents, and government. Seventy-two out of one hundred and thirty-four
participants (72/134) mentioned that they needed support from teachers.
Forty-four out of one hundred and thirty-four participants (44/134)
mentioned that they needed support from the school. Twenty-four out of
one hundred and thirty-four participants (24/134) mentioned that they
needed support from themselves. Twelve out of one hundred and thirty-four

25
participants (12/134) mentioned that they needed support from peers.
Eleven out of one hundred and thirty-four participants (11/134) mentioned
that they needed support from parents. Two out of one hundred and thirty-
four participants (2/ 134) mentioned that they needed support from the
government.

Teachers
Students reported that they needed support from teachers in order to
have more motivation (see Appendix C). Two-subcategories emerged:
teacher characteristics and teaching ability. Both are discussed below.

1. Teachers’ Characteristics
Learners reported that they needed support from teachers in order to
have more motivation (see Appendix C). The data from the open-ended
questionnaire revealed that the survey participants needed teachers who
were native speakers and friendly so that they had more motivation to study
the language. Thirteen (13) participants mentioned that they wanted native
speakers to teach. Three (3) participants answered that they wanted a
friendly English teacher. In the interviews, ten interview participants from
motivation levels also confirmed that teacher’s characteristics helped them
become more motivated. It was found that most of the participants wanted
teachers who were native speakers because they had good pronunciation
and taught enjoyably. The interview participants who were in low
motivation preferred Uzbek teachers or native speaker teachers with Uzbek
teaching assistants because with Uzbek teachers in class, they would feel
more comfortable. This study shows that five out of sixteen (5/ 16)
interview participants said that either Uzbek teachers or native speaker

26
teachers were good at teaching English. Two out of sixteen (2/ 16) interview
participants said that native speaker teachers and Uzbek co-teachers were
better. Seven out of sixteen (7/ 16) interview participants preferred native
speakers as teachers. Two of sixteen (2/ 16) interview participants wanted
Uzbek teachers. Some examples of responses regarding this preference are
as follows:

 Student 2 (very high): “Native speaker teachers are better than

Uzbek teachers, they have good pronunciation…”
 Student 11 (average): “Both Uzbek teachers and native speaker
teachers are fine for me…”
 Student 13 (low): “The Uzbek teacher teaches well already, if
native speaker teachers come to teach, classmates don’t dare to
speak…”

2. Teacher’s Abilities
The data from the open-ended questionnaire revealed that 103
survey participants needed support from the teacher’s ability so that they
have more motivation. The teaching abilities consisted of cognitive abilities,
communicative abilities, motor abilities and emotional abilities.

2.1 Cognitive Abilities

The cognitive abilities require that the teacher must be able to
understand the subject matter and related skills thought processes and
attitudes at a level and in a manner, which facilitates organization and
integration of information, and interpretation and evaluation of ideas. The
teachers should be able to learn, understand, select, and use teaching

27
strategies appropriate to the level, ability, and interests of the students in the
class. Most of the survey participants wanted support from teachers’
cognitive abilities. They would like the teacher to teach well and
interestingly, and support the four English skills (reading, listening,
speaking, and writing). To elaborate, sixteen (16) survey participants said
that teachers should teach interestingly. Seven (7) survey participants said
that teachers should be able to support reading, speaking, writing and
listening. Four (4) survey participants mentioned that teachers should tell
the importance and benefits of English to students so that students would
like to study English more. Three (3) survey participants said that teachers
should teach more English in class so that they can learn more. Two (2)
survey participants said that teachers should teach well. Three survey (3)
participants said that teachers should use English in class. Two (2) survey
participants said that teachers should use new and various methods to teach
so that students would be more interested to study English. Two (2) survey
participant said that teachers should follow the curriculum. One (1) survey
participant said that teachers should introduce English books, movies, songs
and others to students to increase their interest in English. In the interview,
most of the interview participants also reported that they wanted support for
cognitive abilities. For example, they would like to have someone to tell
them the importance and benefits of learning English. In addition, every
interview participant stated that they wanted to have more activities in class.
They felt that these activities helped them to enjoy English class. Teachers
should not only teach and have students work in the exercise books. They
should prepare more classroom activities. All sixteen interview participants
mentioned that teachers should teach interestingly. Examples of the specific
responses regarding teachers are shown below.

28
  Student 3 (very high): “I want teachers to teach English and make
jokes sometimes…”
 Student 8 (high): “Teachers should teach interestingly, and tell jokes
to students…”
 Student 10 (average): “Teachers should make students want to study
and teach interestingly…”
 Student 16 (low): “Teachers should teach interestingly, understand
students and be in a good mood…”

2.2 Communicative Abilities

Communicative abilities allow teachers to communicate effectively
with students, colleagues, aides, principals, parents, and others as needed. In
this research, participants mentioned that they need support from teachers
who are able to communicate effectively with their students. They would
like teachers to be able to understand students and make students understand
the lessons. Seven (7) survey participants said that teachers should be able
to make students understand what they teach in class. In the interview, nine
out of sixteen (9/ 16) interview participants mentioned that they needed
teachers who could understand students and make students understand the
lesson. Some examples of responses voicing this concern are as follows:

 Student 1 (very high): “When students ask questions, the teachers

should give the correct answers and examples for us to better
understand the lesson.”
 Student 5 (high): “Teachers should make students understand, not

29
 only let students copy and write…”
 Student 12 (average): “Teachers should have educational games to
help students better understand the lesson.”
 Student 15 (low): “Sometimes I don’t want to study, because the
teacher can’t explain very well, students and teachers can’t
understand each other.”

2.3. Motor Abilities

Motor abilities require that the teacher should possess sufficient
sensory function to develop and maintain awareness of all students in the
classroom, and sufficient motor function to move about the classroom,
manage materials and supplies, and demonstrate and supervise classroom
activities. In the questionnaire, most of the survey participants mentioned
that the teacher should prepare activities and add more active teaching
materials and content.

2.4 Emotional Abilities

The teachers should possess emotional abilities to be able to
demonstrate the emotional stability required for full utilization of their
intellectual abilities and judgment and be able to “read” and understand
different social situations and communicate effectively in social
interactions. Many participants mentioned that a teacher with high-
functioning emotional abilities could help them increase their motivation
level. Five (5) survey participants mentioned that they would like the
teacher to maintain a good atmosphere in class and try to make students feel
comfortable. Six (6) survey participants said that teachers should encourage

30
students to study English.
In the interviews, the participants said that they enjoyed a good
atmosphere in class; it could help them to be relaxed. Teachers should not
make students feel nervous all the time. Teachers can sometimes tell jokes.
Teachers should avoid saying bad words to students; they should say
something positive. Four out of sixteen (4/ 16) interview participants
mentioned that teachers should encourage students. Some examples of these
responses are as follows:

 Student 6 (high): “Ask students to read, and don’t give too many
comments when they read it wrong, let them speak first…”
 Student 13 (low): “The Uzbek teacher teaches well, he encourages
us to speak out.”

In summary, the participants wanted more support from teachers. They

felt that teachers should encourage students to study, and make students use
English. Teachers should also maintain a classroom atmosphere that is
conducive to learning and make student feel relaxed. Eight out of sixteen
(8/16) interview participants wanted the teachers to maintain a conducive
atmosphere and make students feel relaxed.

 Student 1 (very high): “Teachers should create a conducive

atmosphere in class, and make classmates help each other to study
so that the naughty students can pay more attention.”
 Student 8 (high): “Teachers should crack jokes with students
sometimes; don’t be too serious, and don’t let students feel
nervous.”

31
  Student 14 (low): “Teachers should make students feel relaxed when
studying…”

School
Students reported that they needed support from the school in order to
have more motivation (see Appendix C). The participants also mentioned
that students spend a lot of time in school and that therefore the school is an
important place in their development. They thought support from the school
could help them increase their motivation level. They suggested several
things they felt important, including that the school hire more native
speakers, add more new and modern facilities, have more English classes,
and have more activities both inside and outside of school with native
speakers. In the interviews, most of the participants confirmed the same
ideas. In order to increase motivation, most of the participants mentioned
that they would like to be taught by native speakers and have new and
modern facilities which they felt could help them enjoy English class and
more learn effectively. The school could also have more activities in
English, such as: English camps, English shows, and an English student-
exchange program. The school should add more English tutorial classes and
tell students about the importance of learning English.
I found that most of the interview participants wanted native
speakers to teach them because they have good pronunciation and are fun.
The interview participants who are low motivation preferred Uzbek teachers
or native speakers with an Uzbek co-teacher because, with Uzbek teachers
in class, they thought they would feel more comfortable. Five out of sixteen
(5/ 16) interview participants said that either Uzbek teachers or native
speaker teachers were good at teaching English. Two out of sixteen (2/ 16)

32
interview participants said that native speaker teachers and Uzbek co-
teachers were better. Seven out of sixteen (7/ 16) interview participants
preferred native speakers as teachers. Two of sixteen (2/ 16) interview
participants wanted Uzbek teachers only.

Self
Participants reported that they needed to support themselves better in
order to have more motivation (see Appendix C). Self Determination
Theory (SDT) highlights the importance of a “human’s evolved inner
resources of personality development and behavioral self-regulation” (Deci
& Ryan, 2000). Many participants also noticed the importance of
developing motivation within themselves. For example, many felt they
should study and practice English more often, study harder, and pay more
attention in class. Twenty-four (24) survey participants mentioned that they
needed more support from themselves. Twelve (12) survey participants said
that they should practice writing, speaking, listening, and reading, because
they will get higher scores on tests and it will make them more confident.
Four (4) survey participants said that they should read more about English
in order for them to develop their vocabulary. Four (4) survey participants
said that they should watch cartoons or movies and listen to music in
English for them to be exposed to authentic situations. Two (2) survey
participants said that they should look up the meaning of English words for
them to be able to use the words correctly. Two (2) survey participants said
that they should recite vocabulary every day so that they can memorize and
use the words to construct sentences.
The interviews reveal similar findings. The interview participants
thought they themselves were very important to increase motivation. They

33
should practice English, study hard, and pay more attention in class.
Specifically:

 Student 3 (very high): “We can add one-to-one tutorial classes for
students. If I know more, I will want to learn more.”
 Student 9 (average): “We should study hard, if we don’t, nobody
can help us.”
 Student 15 (low): “We should pay attention in class, sometimes I
don’t pay attention, and that is not good.”

Peers
Participants reported that they needed support from peers in order to
have more motivation (see Appendix C). Peers in this research mean friends
in school. Many participants mentioned that their friends in school could
help them increase their motivation by telling them the importance of
English, asking them to join English activities, introducing English
books/movies, and helping them study English. Twelve survey participants
mentioned that they felt support from friends in school helped to increase
students’ motivation levels. Eight out of twelve (8/12) survey participants
said that friends in school should tell them the importance and benefits of
English learning. Three (3) survey participants said that friends in school
should encourage friends to study English. One (1) survey participant said
that friends in school should introduce English books, movies, etc. to other
friends. Many interview participants mentioned the same thing. Seven out
of sixteen (7/16) interview participants mentioned that friends should tell
the importance and benefits of English to learners.

34
Support from Parents
Participants reported that they needed support from parents in order
to have more motivation (see Appendix C). Parents were very important for
students studying English as they could tell students the importance and the
benefits of studying English. There were eleven (11) survey participants
who mentioned that they wanted support from their parents. Six out of
eleven (6/11) survey participants said that parents should tell the importance
and the benefits of English to them. Three (3) survey participants said that
parents should encourage students to speak with foreigners. Two (2) survey
participants said that parents should introduce English books, movies, etc. to
them. In the interviews, four out of sixteen (4/16) interview participants
mentioned that parents should tell the importance and the benefits of
studying English.

Support from the Government

A small number of participants reported that they needed support
from the government in order to enhance motivation toward English
learning (see Appendix C). They wanted government support through
making more English activities, giving more scholarships for students to
study abroad, and giving more educational support. Two (2) survey
participants mentioned that they wanted support from the government: one
(1) survey participant said that the government should give educational
support; and one (1) survey participant said that the government should
provide scholarships for students to study abroad. In the interviews, two out
of sixteen (2/16) interview participants mentioned that the government
should support education.
In summary, this section interpreted the results of the study, based on the

35
quantitative analysis of data to answer the research questions. It shows that
the students’ motivation toward English language learning was high and
that instrumental motivation was the main type of motivation they
experienced. The research results revealed that there was no significant
difference between lower secondary and upper secondary students’
motivation. For the qualitative question, it was found that students from
lower secondary and upper secondary wanted the support of teachers, the
school, self, peers, parents, and the government.

Ⅴ. Discussion

1. Integrative Motivation vs. Instrumental Motivation

Based on comparisons of different types of motivation (integrative

motivation and instrumental motivation), it appears that both lower
secondary and upper secondary students’ motivation was high (M = 4.16–
4.30, SD = .51–.64), and that students’ instrumental motivation level was
higher than their integrative motivation level (M = 4.16–4.30, SD
= .51–.64). The results of this study are consistent with Kyriacou and Zhu
(2008), who found that high school students’ English learning motivation
was dominated by instrumental motivation rather than for integrative
reasons, and Moiinvaziri (2008), who found that students were highly
motivated in both instrumental and integrative orientations. The basic
scheme of Gardner’s 2006 “Socio-educational Model of Second Language
Acquisition” was explicit in indicating that the educational setting and the
cultural context were expected to have a strong influence on motivation.

36
2. Motivation vs. Educational Level

Sung and Padilla (1998) found out that elementary students were
more motivated than secondary students toward learning Chinese, Japanese,
and Korean. In addition, Baker and MacIntyre (2000) also reported that
younger learners in their study were more motivated than older learners.
According to Williams et al. (2002), seventh graders scored much higher
than ninth graders on the need for language, integrative orientation,
favorable attitude toward instructors, and perceived self-ability and
achievement. However, this research study found that the motivation level
(both integrative and instrumental) of upper secondary students was higher
than lower secondary students (M = 4.16–4.30, SD = .51–.64). The finding
was not consistent with previous studies which revealed that the younger
learners were more motivated than older learners. This study was consistent
with Wong (2008) and Kormos and Csizér (2008) which found that older
learners were more motivated than younger learners. In this study, the
reason that the motivation level of upper secondary students was higher than
lower secondary students may be that upper secondary students need to pass
a public university entrance examination in which English is tested.

3. Support for Increasing Students’ Motivation

The results of the study show that students from lower secondary and
upper secondary levels wanted more support from teachers, the school, self,
peers, parents, and the government. The teacher was the most important
support for heightening students’ motivation. Teachers should have better
teaching ability and be friendly to students. The school should hire more

37
native speakers to teach English, add newer facilities, and prepare more
English activities. The students should study hard and pay attention in class.
In addition, peers in the school can also help to increase students’
motivation levels. Peers should talk about the importance and benefits of
English to students, invite students to attend English activities, and
encourage them to study English. Moreover, parents should encourage
students to study English, and provide money for their children to attend
tutorial classes and study abroad. Furthermore, the government should
provide more scholarships for students to study overseas. This study offers
in-depth information for educators to consider when to enhance motivation
towards English language learning. It is also a springboard for others to
listen to students, since the students know what they need to motivate them.

VI. Conclusion

This study examined Uzbek learners’ motivation towards learning

English language in secondary school. The research reveals that the
students’ motivation toward English language learning was high.
Instrumental motivation was the main type of motivation. There was no
significant difference between lower secondary and upper secondary
students’ motivation. The findings pointed out that teaching is not only
about teachers; it is also about students. After hearing from students, some
important points about what support students need for heightening their
motivation in English language learning were noticed. In as much as the
students want school facilities as support for learning English, they also
want support from teachers. For instance, they want their teachers to
maintain a comfortable environment. Moreover, they want their teachers to

38
prepare more activities. They also need encouragement from their teachers.
In other words, the students want their teachers to spend ample time with
them in a friendly atmosphere. This creates a conducive environment to
approach their teachers without feeling scared. Finally, the teachers should
be updated with the current trends in teaching English and prepare more
activities for students to be attracted to learn English. As such, teachers are
seen by students to have the two-fold responsibility of being both educators
and motivators.

References

Al-Tamimi, A., & Shuib, M. (2009). Motivation and attitudes towards

learning English: A study of petroleum engineering undergraduates at
Hadhramout University of Sciences and Technology. GEMA: Online
Journal of Language Studies, 9(2), 29-55.
Baker, S. C., & MacIntyre, P. D. (2000). The role of gender and immersion
in communication and second language orientations. Language
Learning, 50(2), 311-341.
Best, J. W. (1981). Research in education (5th ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
Prentice Hall.
Biehler, R. F., & Snowman, J. (1974). Psychology applied to teaching.
Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Brown, H. D. (2000). Principles of language learning and teaching. New
Jersey: Prentice Hall.
Choosri, C., & Intharaksa, U. (2011). Relationship between motivation and

39
 students’ English learning achievement: A study of the second-year
vocational certificate level Hadyai Technical College students. In
Proceedings- Factors Affecting English Language Teaching and
Learning of the 3rd International Conference on Humanities and
Social Sciences (pp. 1-15), April 2, 2011. Songkla: Faculty of Liberal
Arts, Prince of Songkla University.
Cooper, R. L., & Fishman, J. A. (1977). A study of language attitudes. In J.
A. Fishman, R. L. Cooper, & A. W. Conrad (Eds.), The spread of
English (pp. 239-276). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The “what” and “why” of goal pursuits:
Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological
Inquiry, 11(4), 227-268.
Degang, M. (2010). Motivation toward English language learning of the
second year undergraduate Thai students majoring in Business
English at an English-medium university. Master’s project, Business
English for International Communication, Graduate School,
Srinakharinwirot University.
Downing, K., &. Yu, B. (2012). Determinants of international students’
adaptation: examining effects of integrative motivation, instrumental
motivation and second language proficiency. Educational Studies,
38(4), 457-471.
Dörnyei, Z. (1994). Motivation and motivating in the foreign language
classroom. The modern language journal, 78(3), 273-284.
Dörnyei, Z. (1998). Motivation in second and foreign language learning.
Language Teaching, 31, 117-135.
Dörnyei, Z. (2001a). Motivational strategies in the language classroom.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

40
Dörnyei, Z. (2001b). Teaching and researching motivation. Essex: Pearson
Education.
Dörnyei, Z. (2003). Questionnaires in second language research:
Construction, administration, and processing. London: Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates.
Dörnyei, Z. (2005). The psychology of the language learner: Individual
differences in second language acquisition. London: Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates.
Dörnyei, Z. (2009). The psychology of second language acquisition.
Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Dörnyei, Z., & Csizér, K. (2005). The effects of intercultural contact and
tourism on language attitudes and language learning motivation.
Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 24(4), 327-357.
Gardner, R. C. (1982). Language attitudes and language learning. In E. B.
Ryan, & H. Giles (Eds.), Attitudes towards language variation, (pp.
132-147). London: Edward Arnold.
Gardner, R. C. (1985a). The attitude/ motivation test battery [Technical
report]. Retrieved from http://publish.uwo.ca/~gardner/docs/AMTB
manual.pdf
Gardner, R. C. (1985b). Social psychology and second language learning:
The role of attitudes and motivation. Baltimore, Maryland: Edward
Arnold.
Gardner, R. C. (2006). The socio-educational model of second language
acquisition: A research paradigm. In S. H. Foster-Cohen, M. Medved
Kajnovic, & J. Mihaljevic Djigunovic (Eds.), Eurosla yearbook, (pp.
237-260). Amsterdam: John Benjamin.

41
Gardner, R. C., & Lambert, W. E. (1959). Motivational variables in second
language acquisition. In R. C. Gardner (Ed.), Social psychology and
second language learning: The role of attitudes and motivation (pp.
100-123). London: Edward Arnold.
Gardner, R. C., & Lambert, W. E. (1972). Attitudes and motivation in
second language learning. Rowley, MA: Newbury.
Gardner, R. C., Lalonde, R. N., & Moorcraft, R. (1985). The role of
attitudes and motivation in second language learning: Correlational
and experimental considerations. Language Learning, 35, 207-227.
Gardner, R. C., Lalonde, R. N. Moorcroft, R., & Evers, F. T. (1987). Second
language attrition: The role of motivation and use. Journal of
Language and Social Psychology, 6, 29-47.

Gardner, R. C., & Masgoret, A. M. (2003). Attitudes, motivation, and

second language learning: A meta-analysis of studies conducted by
Gardner and associates. Language Learning, 53, 123-163.
Gardner, R. C., Tremblay, P. F., & Masgoret, A-M. (1997). Towards a full
model of second language learning: An empirical investigation. The
Modern Language Journal, 81(3), 344-362.
Kitjaroonchai, N., & Kitjaroonchai, T. (2012). Motivation toward English
language learning of Thai students majoring in English at Asia-
Pacific International University. Catalyst, 7(1), 21-40.
Kormos, J., & Csizér, K. (2008). Age-related differences in the motivation
of learning English as a foreign language: Attitudes, selves, and
motivated learning behavior. Language Learning, 58(2), 327-355.
Kyriacou, C., & Zhu, D. (2008). Shanghai pupil’s motivation towards
learning English and the perceived influence of important others.

42
 Educational Studies, 34(2), 7-104.
Liu, M. (2007). Chinese students’ motivation to learn English at the tertiary
level. Asian EFL Journal, 9(1), 126-146.
Moiinvaziri, M. (2008). Motivational orientation in English language
learning: A study of Iranian undergraduate students. Global practices
of language teaching. In Proceeding of International Online
Language Conference (IOLC), (pp. 126-135). Boca Raton, Florida:
Universal.
Mowrer, O. H. (1950). Learning theory and personality dynamics. New
York: Ronald Press.
Noels, K. A., Clément, R., & Pelletier, L. G. (2003). Intrinsic, extrinsic, and
integrative orientations of French-Canadian learners of English. The
Canadian Modern Language Review, 59, 589-607.

Oranpattanachai, P. (2013). Motivation and English language achievement

of Thai undergraduate students. LEARN Journal: Language
Education and Acquisition Research Network, 6(1), 27-49.
Ramage, K. (1990). Motivational factors and persistence in foreign
language study. Language Learning, 40(2), 189-219.
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations:
Classic definitions and new directions. Contemporary Educational
Psychology, 25(1), 54-67.
Samimy, K. K., & Tabuse, M. (1992). Affective variables and a less
commonly taught language: A study in beginning Japanese classes.
Language Learning, 42(3), 377-398.
Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded
theory procedures and techniques. London: Sage.

43
Sung, H., & Padilla, A. M. (1998). Student motivation, parental attitudes,
and involvement in the learning of Asian languages in elementary and
secondary schools. Modern Language Journal, 82(2), 205-216.
Sung, K. (2010). Language attitudes among American college students in
Chinese language classes. In J. Chen, C. Wang, & J. Cai (Eds.),
Teaching and learning Chinese: Issues and perspectives (pp. 101-
116). Charlotte, NC: Information Age.
Tahaineh, Y. (2013). Jordanian undergraduates’ motivations and attitudes
towards learning English in EFL context. International Review of
Social Sciences and Humanities, 4(2), 159-180.
Williams, M., Burden, R., & Lanvers, U. (2002). French is the language of
love and stuff: Student perceptions of issues related to motivation in
learning a foreign language. British Educational Research Journal,
28(4), 503-528.

Wong, R. M. (2008). Motivation to learn English and age differences: The

case of Chinese immigrants. Glass, 3(2), 365-404

44
 Appendices

Appendix A

MOTIVATION QUESTIONNAIRE

This questionnaire is to survey the motivation in learning English of lower

secondary and upper secondary students at a school which is located in the

45
central part of Uzbekistan.
Directions: This questionnaire is divided into 3 parts.
Part I: Student General Information
Part II: Motivational items (integrative motivation and instrumental
motivation).
Part III: An open-ended question about what support students want for
increasing their motivation towards English language learning.

Part I: Student General Information Instructions: Please fill in the blanks or

check (√) the appropriate box. 1.
Gender: ( ) male ( ) female
2. Age:
3. Grade:
4. Email address:

Part II: Motivational Items (Integrative Motivation and Instrumental

Motivation)
Instructions: Please indicate your choice with a check (√) in the appropriate
box which appears most applicable to you. We would urge you to carefully
read and give accurate answers since the success of this study depends upon
your input. (1 = strongly disagree, 2 = disagree, 3 = moderate, 4 = agree, 5 =
strongly agree)

Motivational items
1 2 3 4 5

1. Studying English is important because I would like 1 2 3 4 5

to meet foreigners with whom I can speak English

46
2. Studying English is important because it will 1 2 3 4 5
enable me to better understand and appreciate art and
literature in the English language.
3. Studying English is important because I will be 1 2 3 4 5
able to participate more freely in the activities of the
English club.
4. Studying English is important because it will allow 1 2 3 4 5
me to be more at ease with people who speak
English.
5. Studying English is important because it will allow 1 2 3 4 5
me to know more native speakers of English who are
open-minded and modern people.
6. Studying English is important because it helps me 1 2 3 4 5
understand and appreciate music and songs in the
English language.
7. Studying English is important because it will allow 1 2 3 4 5
me to know more native speakers who are sociable
and hospitable.
8. Studying English is important because it will 1 2 3 4 5
enable me to better understand and appreciate the
ways of life of native speakers of English.
9. Studying English is important because it will allow 1 2 3 4 5
me to meet and converse with more and varied
people.
10. Studying English is important because I can keep 1 2 3 4 5
in touch with foreign friends and acquaintances.
11. Studying English is important because I would 1 2 3 4 5
like to know more about native speakers of English.

47
12. Studying English is important because I will be 1 2 3 4 5
able to interact more easily with speakers of
English.
13. Studying English is important because I would 1 2 3 4 5
like to know more about native speakers of English
who are kind and cheerful.
14. Studying English is important because I would 1 2 3 4 5
like to know more native speakers of English.
15. Studying English is important because it will 1 2 3 4 5
allow me to know more native speakers of English
who are kind and friendly.
16. Studying English is important because I may 1 2 3 4 5
need it later (e.g., for job, studies).
17. Studying English is important because other 1 2 3 4 5
people will respect me more if I know English.
18. Studying English is important because I will be 1 2 3 4 5
able to search for information and materials in
English on the Internet.
19. Studying English is important because I will 1 2 3 4 5
learn more about what’s happening in the world.
20. Studying English is important because language 1 2 3 4 5
learning often gives me a feeling of success.
21. Studying English is important because language 1 2 3 4 5
learning often makes me happy.
22. Studying English is important because it 1 2 3 4 5
provides an interesting intellectual activity.
23. Studying English is important because it will 1 2 3 4 5
make me appear more educated.
24. Studying English is important because I believe 1 2 3 4 5

48
 an educated person is supposed to be able to speak
English.

25. Studying English is important because it helps 1 2 3 4 5

me to understand English-speaking films, videos,
TV and radio
26. Studying English is important because it will be 1 2 3 4 5
useful in getting a good job.
27. Studying English is important because without 1 2 3 4 5
it, one cannot be successful in any field.
28. Studying English is important because I will 1 2 3 4 5
need it for my career
29. Studying English is important because it will 1 2 3 4 5
enable me to learn more about the world.
30. Studying English is important because it will 1 2 3 4 5
help me become a more knowledgeable person.

Part III: Open-Ended Question. 31. What support do you want for
increasing your level of motivation towards English language learning?

__________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________

49
__________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________
_______

50
Appendix B
INTERVIEW GUIDE

The interview questions:

1. What’s your name?

2. Which class are you in?
3. Do you like studying English?
4. Why do/don’t you like studying English?
5. Why are you studying English?
6. How do you feel about your English class?
7. What do you like about your English class?
8. What don’t you like about your English class?
9. What support do you need for increasing your level of motivation
towards English language learning?

51
 Appendix C
CATEGORIZATION OF THE OPEN-ENDED QUESTION

Table A-1 Support from Teachers

Categorization Pattern
Times

Teachers’ characteristic Native teacher 23

26 Friendly teacher 3
Teachers’ abilities
103 Cognitive abilities 40
Teach interestingly
16
Support reading, speaking, writing and
listening
7
Tell the importance and benefits of English 4
Use new and varied methods 2
Teach well 2
Teach in English 3
Teach more English 3
Follow the curriculum
2
Introduce English books, movies, songs, etc. 1
Communicative abilities
7 Make students understand
7
Table A-1 (Continued)

52
53
 Categorization Pattern Times

Motor abilities
44 Use more activities 15
Watch English movies 8
Have activities with native speakers 5
Listen to English music/songs 6
English camps 3
Learning outside the classroom 3
Playing games in class 2
Hold English shows for students 2

Emotional abilities Encourage students 6

11 Maintain a good atmosphere 5

54
Table A -2 Support from the School

Categorization Pattern
Times

School
44 Let native speakers teach 11
Acquire new facilities 5
Tell the importance of English 4
Add more English classes 3
Add more tutorial classes 4
Supply exchange students 3
Provide scholarships to go abroad 2
Hold English competitions 3
Support teaching and learning 2
Study abroad 2
Required to teach all subjects in English 2
Use English in daily life at school 1
Hold English shows 1
Hold English camps 1

Table A-3/4 Support from Self and Peers

Categorization Pattern Times

Self
24 Practice writing, speaking, listening, reading 7
Study hard 4
Pay attention in class 2
Read more about English 2

55
 Watch cartoons or movies, listen to music in English 2
Find the meaning of English words 2
Have more tutorial classes 1
Recite vocabulary every day 2
Go abroad 1
Studied English since I was baby 1

Peers Tell the importance and benefits of English learning 4

12 Encourage friends to study English 2
Invite friends to attend English activities 3
Help each other to study English 2
Introduce English books, movies, etc. 1

Table A-4 Support from Parents

Categorization Pattern Times

Parents Tell the importance and benefits of English 3

11 Keep money for studying abroad 2
Encourage students to speak with foreigners 2
Let children have more tutorial classes 2
Introduce English books, movies, etc. 2
Table A-5 Support from the Government
Categorization Pattern Times

Government Support of education 1

2 Provide scholarships to study abroad 1

56
국문초록

우즈베키스탄 학생들의 영어 학습 동기

영어영문학과 샤흘러 아자마토바

지도교수황규홍

본 연구에서는 우즈베키스탄 중등학교 학생들의 영어 학습 동기 (도구적

동기와 통합적 동기) 수준과 유형을 주로 조사하였다. 특히 중학교 학생들과

고등학교 학생들의 영어 학습 동기에 있어서 어떤 차이점이 있는지를 탐구하는

것이 주된 목적이다. 연구방법은 혼합 방법 접근법을 시도하였는데, 이 방법은

설문지와 반구조화된 인터뷰를 함께 사용하는 것이다. 설문지는 336 명의

우즈베키스탄 중학교와 고등학교 학생들에게 배포하였으며 16 명을 대상으로

인터뷰를 실시하였다.

본 연구의 결과는 다음과 같다. 첫째, 전반적으로 중학교와 고등학교

학생들의 영어 동기는 높은 편이었으며, 도구적 동기가 통합적 동기보다 더 높다.

둘째, 중학교 학생의 영어 학습 동기와 고등학교 학생의 영어 학습 동기 사이의

차이는 거의 없었다. 그리고 중학교 학생과 고등학교 학생이 필요로 하는 지원을

조사한 결과 교사, 학교, 자기자신, 동료, 부모, 정부 등으로부터의 지원이

필요하고 그 중에서 교사의 동기부여가 가장 중요한 것으로 나타났다. 즉,

57
학생들은 교사들이 좀 더 많은 수업활동과 최신 교수법을 을 도입하고, 학생들을

격려하기를 원하며, 친근한 학습환경을 조성해 주길 원하며 자신들에게

교육자와 동기부여자가 되어 주길 희망한다.

주요어: 통합적 동기, 도구적 동기, 영어 학습, 우즈베키스탄 EFL 학습자

58