VIETNAMNATIONALUNIVERSITY, HANOI UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES FACULTY OF POST-GRADUATE STUDIES ------------------- TRẦN HOÀI LINH A STUDY ON THE MOTIVATION IN LEARNING ENGLISH OF GIFTED STUDENTS AT HIGH SCHOOL FOR GIFTED STUDENTS, HANOI NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF EDUCATION (NGHIÊN CỨU VỀ ĐỘNG CƠ HỌC TIẾNG ANH CỦA HỌC SINH CHUYÊN, TRƯỜNG THPT CHUYÊN, ĐẠI HỌC SƯ PHẠM) M.A. MINOR PROGRAMME THESIS Field: English Teaching Methodology Code: 60140111 HANOI – 2014 VIETNAMNATIONALUNIVERSITY, HANOI UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES FACULTY OF POST-GRADUATE STUDIES ------------------- TRẦN HOÀI LINH A STUDY ON THE MOTIVATION IN LEARNING ENGLISH OF GIFTED STUDENTS AT HIGH SCHOOL FOR GIFTED STUDENTS, HANOI NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF EDUCATION (NGHIÊN CỨU VỀ ĐỘNG CƠ HỌC TIẾNG ANH CỦA HỌC SINH CHUYÊN, TRƯỜNG THPT CHUYÊN, ĐẠI HỌC SƯ PHẠM) M.A. MINOR PROGRAMME THESIS Field: English Teaching Methodology Code: 60140111 Supervisor: Prof. Dr. Hoàng Văn Vân HANOI – 2014 DECLARATION I hereby certify that the minor thesis entitled “A Study on the Motivation in Learning English of Gifted Students at High School for Gifted Students, Hanoi National University of Education” is the result of my own work in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in English Teaching Methodology at Faculty of Post-graduate Studies, University of Languages and International Studies, Vietnam National University, Hanoi. The research has not been submitted to any other university or institution wholly and partially. Hanoi, 2014 Trần Hoài Linh i ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This thesis could not have been completed without the help and support from a number of people. First and foremost, I would like to express my sincere gratitude to Prof. Dr. Hoang Van Van, my supervisor, who has patiently and constantly supported me through the stages of the study, and whose stimulating ideas, expertise, and suggestions have inspired me greatly through my growth as an academic researcher. A special word of thanks goes to my students, without whom it would never have been possible for me to have this thesis accomplished. Last by not least, I am greatly indebted to my family for the sacrifice they have devoted to the fulfillment of this academic work. ii ABSTRACT This study was intended to investigate the motivation of English gifted students at High School for Gifted Students, Hanoi National University of Education (HNUE). More specifically, the researcher attempted to offer several common definitions and perceptions of motivation and identify the categories of motivation, perceived by different theories by reviewing several models of language learning motivation up to now. More importantly, the study aims to investigate the type of motivations that exist among English gifted students at High School for Gifted Students, HNUE and examine whether gifted students of grades 10, 11 and 12 have the same or different types of English learning motivation. In the study, 158 students participated in completing the questionnaire reflecting the learning motivation. The results of the study reveal that the student surveyed had high motivation of learning English, and the types of motivation that prevails among those students were intrinsic, extrinsic, instrumental and integrative motivation. Moreover, it was also found that students of grade 11 were more integrative and intrinsic oriented than those in grade 10 and grade 12. Finally, based on the findings, some suggestions for teachers of these classes are offered. iii LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS, TABLES AND FIGURES Figure 1: Socioeducational Model ........................................................................... 7 Figure 2: General Model of Goal Setting Theory ................................................... 10 Table 1: Information on the Number of Students Surveyed ...................................... 16 Table 2: Percentage of Reasons for Choosing English as a Specialized Subject. ......... 20 Figure 3: Students’ Reasons for Choosing English Specialized Subject.................. 20 Table 3: Students’ Main Goal of Learning ............................................................. 21 Figure 4: Students’ Main Goal of Learning .............................................................. 22 Figure 5: Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivation of Grade 10 Students ......................... 22 Figure 6: Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivation of Grade 11 Students ......................... 23 Figure 7: Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivation of Grade 12 Students ........................ 23 Table 4: Mean Value of Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivation ................................... 23 Figure 8: Instrumental and Integrative Motivation of Grade 10 Students ............... 24 Figure 9: Instrumental and Integrative Motivation of Grade 11 Students ............... 25 Figure 10: Instrumental and Integrative Motivation of Grade 12 Students ............. 25 Table 5: Mean Comparison among Three Grades .................................................. 25 Figure 11: Amotivation Pattern of Grade 10 Students .............................................. 26 Figure 12: Amotivation Pattern of Grade 11 Students ............................................... 26 Figure 13: Amotivation Pattern of Grade 12 Students ............................................... 27 Table 6: Comparison of Amotivation Pattern among Three Grades ....................... 27 Table 7: Attitude Towards Learning Activities ......................................................... 28 Table 8: Students’ Interest and Desire to Learn English ............................................ 28 Figure 14: Students’ Motivation to Learn English to Communicate ........................... 29 Abbreviations LLM: Language Learning Motivation HNUE: Hanoi National University of Education L2: second language AMBT: Attitude / Motivation Test Battery iv TABLE OF CONTENTS DECLARATION ............................................................................................................I ABSTRACT..................................................................................................................III PART A: INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................ 1 1. RATIONALE FOR THE STUDY .................................................................... 1 2. AIMS OF THE RESEARCH ............................................................................ 2 3. OBJECTIVES OF THE RESEARCH.............................................................. 2 4. RESEARCH QUESTIONS ............................................................................... 2 5. SCOPE OF THE RESEARCH ......................................................................... 3 6. SIGNIFICANCE OF THE RESEARCH.......................................................... 3 7. STRUCTURAL ORGANIZATION OF THE THESIS ................................... 3 PART B: DEVELOPMENT ......................................................................................... 4 CHAPTER 1: LITERATURE REVIEW ............................................................. 4 1.1. Theoretical Background ................................................................................ 4 1.1.1. Definition of Motivation.......................................................................... 4 1.1.2. Language Learning Motivation ............................................................... 5 1.1.2.1. Socioeducational Model .................................................................... 5 1.1.2.2. Cognitive Revolution ........................................................................ 8 1.2. Review of Previous Studies Related to the Research Area of the Thesis ...... 13 1.3. Summary ..................................................................................................... 15 CHAPTER 2: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ............................................... 16 2.1. Research Setting .......................................................................................... 16 2.2. Subjects ....................................................................................................... 16 2.3. Research Types ........................................................................................... 17 2.4. Data Collection Instruments ........................................................................ 17 2.5. Data Collection Procedures ......................................................................... 18 2.6. Data Analysis .............................................................................................. 19 CHAPTER 3: DATA ANALYSIS ...................................................................... 20 3.1. Students’ Main Goal of Learning ............................................................. 20 3.2. Main Goal of Learning ............................................................................. 21 3.3. Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivation ............................................................ 22 v 3.4. Instrumental and Integrative Motivation ................................................... 24 3.5. Amotivation ............................................................................................. 26 CHAPTER 4: DISCUSSION .............................................................................. 28 4.1. Research Question 1 ................................................................................. 28 3.2.2. Research Question 2 .............................................................................. 30 3.2.3. Additional Findings ............................................................................... 30 PART C: CONCLUSION ........................................................................................... 32 1. RECAPITULATION ....................................................................................... 32 2. CONCLUSION ................................................................................................ 32 3. LIMITATIONS OF THE RESEARCH.......................................................... 33 4. SUGGESTIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH .............................................. 34 REFERENCES ............................................................................................................ 36 APPENDIX 1...................................................................................................................I APPENDIX 2................................................................................................................. V vi PART A: INTRODUCTION 1. Rationale for the Study In an article entitled “How motivation affects learning and behavior”, Ormrod (2014), it claims that the motivation exists in most students, in one way or another. One may be engrossed in a certain subject, play an active role in classroom activities, and obtain high scores at school, while one may be more attentive to the social activities in the society including communicative events and similar occasions. It is undeniable that the motivation has a strong impact on the learning and behaviour of students. Specifically, it affects students’ choice, their goals in learning. It also determines students’ effort and energy as well as the initiation and persistence spent on learning: once they feel motivated they will devote to the study. According to Hussin, Nooreiny, and D'Cruz (2001), a persistent issue claimed by many English teachers is the effort to maintain the students’ interest in learning English. Teachers have to well balance the preparation for the exam and the life- long language skills. Since most researchers and teachers are aware of the importance of motivation in learning, they have been attempting to figure out ways to increase the students’ motivation by carrying out studies of motivation among students. Numerous studies about motivation dated back from the 1960s and have still been one of the favored themes for researchers worldwide. As and old saying “You can lead a horse to water, but you cannot make him drink”, implying that you can lead your students to the treasure of erudition but you cannot reinforce them to “swallow” the knowledge, instead you can let them acquire the knowledge themselves by providing them with learning motivation. I am myself a teacher and I know how crucial the motivation is for teaching and learning. Hence a teacher’s goal is to show his or her students an interesting way to the water by making him a motivated student. To work out the proper way, teachers are supposed to be conscious of students’ own desire as well as their purpose of learning, or to be more specifically, what can motivate and demotivate them in learning. A student who is oriented to pursue natural sciences and does not care much about English would wish to experience a different way of learning and teaching in comparison 1 with the one who is totally devoted to English and studies this subject as his major or passion. This is also the reason I would like to conduct a study on the motivation of students of 3 levels: grade 10, grade 11 and grade 12, who are specialized in English at High School for Gifted Student, Hanoi National University of Education (HNUE). 2. Aims of the Research The study aims at investigating the types of motivations of students majoring in English at High School for Gifted Students, HNUE and whether there are any differences among the motivation surveyed among students in grade 10, grade 11 and grade 12. The results can be a useful source of reference information for teachers of the classes surveyed as well as the classes to come to work out the proper way to improvise the teaching methods and make their students more strongly motivated. 3. Objectives of the Research The study is originally conducted to identiy the change in motivation among gifted students in terms of time. As stated by Ryan (2000), intrinsic motivation fades out with “each advancing grade”. It was also assumed that students were not much as integratively as well as intrinsically motivated as instrumentally and extrinsically motivated. Thus, to find out whether these hypotheses are true among gifted students at High School for Gifted Students (HNUE), the objectives are determined as below:  To identify what types of motivation exist among students at High School for Gifted Students (HNUE) and which types of motivation prevail among students.  To find out if students of different grades have different types of motivation. 4. Research Questions In this investigation, the following research questions were addressed: 1. What types of motivation exist among students at High School for Gifted Students (HNUE)? And which types of motivation prevail? 2. Do gifted students of English in grades 10, 11 and 12 differ in their motivation to learn English, and what are the differences? 2 5. Scope of the Research This study only focused on investigation of the motivation of learning English of students majoring in English, not students who learn English as a normal subject in general, at High School for Gifted Students. 6. Significance of the Research This study aimed to investigate the types of motivation that exist among English gifted students, and the differences in the motivation among students of different grades. Firstly, the survey itself, partly helped students be aware of the importance of motivation in learning, and they could themselves figure out different ways to increase their motivation. Secondly, the results of the finings can be of great use for the teachers of the classes surveyed in the way that they can adapt their teaching methods as well as activities so that their students can be more motivated in learning English. 7. Structural Organization of the Thesis The thesis is organized as follows: Part A - Introduction – provides the rationale of the study, aims and objectives and the significance of the study as well as raises research questions. Part B - Development - consists of three chapters: Chapter One – Literature review – presents an overview of relevant literature on the issues of motivation in second/foreign language learning. Chapter Two – Research methodology – provides a description of research methods, selection of the participants, data collection instruments, and data collection procedures. Chapter Three – Findings and discussions - presents the results of the study and the discussion of the results. Part C – Conclusion - summarises the main points of the study, draw some conclusions, points out the limitations of the study and make some suggestions for further research. 3 PART B: DEVELOPMENT CHAPTER 1: LITERATURE REVIEW 1.1. Theoretical Background 1.1.1. Definition of Motivation For quite a long time, the crucial role of motivation in learning has been widely agreed upon by researchers and teachers worldwide. There are numerous research and studies on motivation as well its correlation with study result with aim to improving students’ achievement in learning a second/foreign language. However, it is complicated to give a concise and satisfactory concept of motivation since it, indeed, involves a lot of disciplines to have a grasp of its multi-face essence. According to Keblawi (2011) it involves “general, educational, social, and cognitive psychology, as well as general educational and social theories and sociolinguistic theories have something to contribute for understanding language learning motivation (LLM) within a formal school context.” The complication of the concept is attributed to the fact that it attempts to explain the action and behavior of an individual while such action and behavior cannot be figured out by a single approach. Though there have been a lot of studies on the issue the subject still remain “uneven and inconsistent” (Dornyei, 2003). To illustrate the confusion and complexity of the motivation’s concept, in his study, Dornyei also ironically compares it with an old umbrella that contains numerous concepts, but unfortunately, they have very little in common. Following are some definitions accumulated from several sources: In the Online Oxford Dictionaries (2013) motivation is defined as “a reason or reasons for acting or behaving in a particular way with interest or enthusiasm” Meanwhile, Harmer (2007: 98) also agrees with Dornyei and Otto (1998: 65) that motivation is “the dynamically changing cumulative arousal or internal drive in a person that initiates, directs, coordinates, amplifies, terminates, and evaluates the cognitive and motor processes whereby initial wishes and desires are selected, prioritized, operationalized and successfully or unsuccessfully acted out”. According to Gardner (1985: 10), 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.” 4 However, such definitions are not adequate to explain the complicated essence of motivation in language learning. To have a deeper understanding, it is necessary to look at the history of the development of the motivation theory with its different components looked from various perspectives. 1.1.2. Language Learning Motivation As mentioned above, researchers still do not share the same points of view on Language learning motivation (LLM) components and the different roles that these components play - individual differences, situational differences, social and cultural factors, and cognition (Renchler, 1992; Belmechri & Hummel, 1998). The complication of the issue is due to its involvement in different aspects. Initially, LLM was looked into on the basis of a behavioural framework to work out “what moved a resting organism into a state of activity”, with heavy reliance on concepts such as instinct, drive, need, energisation, and homeostasis (Weiner, 1990). However, this does not relate much to the educational issue. However, the appearance and advance of another approach, cognitive approach led to a shift to why students engage in the academic tasks. Following are several influential models in LLM. 1.1.2.1. Socioeducational Model Due to the social and cultural impact on language learning, the initial studies on motivation were carried out by social psychologists. Among several models proposed during the sixties and eighties, the most influential model was Socioeducational Model (Gardner, 1985). According to Gardner (1985), motivation is defined as “combination of effort plus desire to achieve the goal of learning the language plus favourable attitudes towards learning the language”. In his study, Gardner mentioned two types of motivation: integrative motivation and instrumental motivation. Accordingly, learners with integrative motivation have an aspiration of learning a foreign language to make friends with other speakers of a language to travel to the places where the language is used. For them, learning about culture is more appealing than the language itself. Integrative motivation stems from the interest in learning the language itself. It is the keenness on communicating with those who use it and the eagerness to integrate with the target language community. 5 As cited in Ahmadi (2011), Falk (1978) assumed that those who have favorable attitudes towards people speaking target language, the target culture and the desire to integrate with the communities where the language is spoken are those who tend to be more successful in studying the language. This form of motivation is known as integrative motivation. Conversely, those who have high instrumental orientation learn a language to pass exams, to gain high grade and to use the language in their professional goals (Gardner & Lambert, 1959). Instrumental motivation refers to practical value in learning the language, for instance, to obtain more job opportunities, strengthen power, or gain access to scientific and technical information. Ahmadi (2011) gave an example in his study about instrumental motivation: A designer in Chile who has just graduated from university and wants to get a well-paid position which would result in changing his economic situation completely. However, the job has one requirement which is good command of English. And the desiring job with a chance of improving financial situation becomes an instrument for him to study English. Both integrative and instrumental motivation prove crucial factors leading to learners’ achievement, integrative motivation is found to contribute more to long term success as perceived by Taylor, Meynard & Rheault (1977); Ellis (1997), Crookes et al. (1991) (cited in Ahmadi’s study). Gardner and Lambert themselves also put more emphasis on integrative motivation than instrumental motivation in a formal learning environment. Socioeducational model consists of several components and they are measured using Attitude / Motivation Test Battery (AMBT). The first component, attitudes towards the learning situation refers to the individual’s attitudes towards academic environment, including towards teachers and towards the course. Meanwhile the integrativeness is valued based on the attitude towards target language group, the interest in the language and integrative orientation. And finally, motivation is evaluated based on the effort spent on learning language, the attitudes towards learning the language, and affinity to learn the target language. 6 Figure 1: Socioeducational Model Source: Gardner (2001), cited in Keblawi (2009) In Gardner’s model, the more important part is integrative motivation, which consists of three different components: integrative orientation, integrativeness, and integrative motivation. He made it clear that orientations concerns the reasons a learner studies the target language, while motivation relates to his spent “effort”, desire and enjoyment. However, the theory also encountered a lot of criticism, mainly because the confusion in the definition of integrative motivation, which can be perceived differently by different researchers. It is described by Clement & Kruidenier (1983) that any reasons that prompt one to learn a language can fall into the category. A reason can be classified instrumental by some, but can be regarded integrative by others. Another point proposed by Shaw (1981) is that while Gardner stressed the integrative motivation, this type, indeed, acts only a petty role because only a small number of learners have chance to interact in an authentic environment. Meanwhile, researchers of constructivist approach worried that the stress on integrative motivation may threaten the individual’s identities since the models implies that to be more successful in learning the target language, one may part with his own identity to adopt the new one, or in other words, assimilated. Such criticism 7 does not mean this model should be eliminated. In fact, it became the base for further expansion, which belongs to the cognitive revolution from the seventies onward. 1.1.2.2. Cognitive Revolution Cognitive Revolution consists of the three prominent theories as follows: 1.1.2.2.1 Self-Determination Theory The theory is regarded as one of the most dominant theory in motivational psychology. Its central premise is there is a tendency in each individual towards personal growth, which is either met or prevented by the environment (Deci & Ryan, 2000). It consists of two types: intrinsic motivation and extrinsic motivation. According to Ryan and Deci (2000) intrinsic motivation is defined as “the doing of an activity for its inherent satisfaction rather than for some separable consequence. When intrinsically motivated, a person is moved to act for the fun or challenge entailed rather than because of external products, pressures or reward”. Meanwhile, extrinsic motivation is defined as “extrinsic motivation is a construct that pertains whenever an activity is done in order to attain some separable outcome. Extrinsic motivation thus contrasts with intrinsic motivation, which refers to doing an activity simply for the enjoyment of the activity itself, rather than its instrumental value (Ryan and Deci, 2000). In general, according to Deci and Ryan, intrinsically motivated behaviors are “out of interest and satisfy the innate psycho-logical needs for competence and autonomy are the prototype of self-deter-mined behavior.” Meanwhile, extrinsically motivated behaviors refer to those that are “executed because they are instrumental to some separable consequence”. Oudeyer et al. (2007) gave an example of intrinsically and extrinsically motivated as following. A child does his homework because he is afraid that his parents will punish him if he fails to finish it. And the homework is done for a separable outcome, for not being sanctioned. This case, he is extrinsically motivated. In contrast, when the kid completes his task since he finds the pleasure and experience the feeling of satisfaction upon discovering new knowledge in doing homework, just like playing video game, he is said to be intrinsically motivated. 8 There is also a term to mention, namely, amotivation, which is the situation when one has no intention to act because of not appreciate the activities or simply not feeling capable of doing that (Deci, 1975). Accordingly, unmotivated individuals fail to sense the relationship between their actions and the actions’ outcome (Pelletier, Fortier, Vallerand, & Briere, 2001). Such individuals may have the feeling of less integrated and less control of their actions, and thus little effort is spent on actions accomplishment. Amotivation often leads to boredom and “poor concentration” in class, poor psychosocial adjustment, high perceived stress at school and school dropout (as cited by Bo Shen et al., 2010). The first type of extrinsic motivation, external regulation is the least autonomous, which is realized with aim to meeting the external demands or to obtain an “externally reward contingency”. Ryan and Deci also gave an example of external regulation. Students may take part in a certain activity because the teacher wants them to do so or else they will be punished or subjected to teacher’s criticism. The behavior is not self determined. Besides constraints or punishment, external regulations can be boosted by rewards or desire, for instance, students study hard to obtain an award from their parents or teachers. The second type is introjected regulation with which learners “begin to internalize the reasons for their actions” (Ryan, 1982). However, this is the internalization of “external contingencies”, and hence is not really self-determined. In this case, the constraints or rewards do not stem from outside but from inside individuals when they feel an obligation to do so due to specific aims. Ryan also exemplified with a case in which student believed that he or she studies the night before an exam since he or she would feel guilty without doing this. A more autonomous type is identification which based on individuals’ wish to enhance their self esteem. This can be explained as following: an individual accepts certain kind of regulation because he has decided to pursue his personal importance or behavior. In a review, Deci and Ryan (2000) gave an example: “A boy who memorizes spelling lists because he sees it as relevant to writing, which he values as a life goal, has identified with the value of this learning activity.” The type considered the most autonomous is integrated regulation at which level a person willingly does an activity and the regulation is consistent with his other 9 concept. More specifically, its main focus is on how the motivation fits with his values and the belief how it gets along with other aspects of his life, which eventually leads to integration. For example, a student may choose to leave other activities behind to study because for him studying well at school is very important. In other words, according to Deci and Ryan (2000), this happens when the regulations are “assimilated to the self”. The more the regulations are assimilated, the more the motivated actions are self-determined. According to Noels (2000, 2001) intrinsic motivation is improved when learners have more autonomy, receive encouraging feedback and are less controlled by teachers. The next category is intrinsic motivation. The intrinsic motivation is described to involve three kinds. The first type is called “knowledge” which is the pleasure to learn new things and obtain new knowledge. The second subcategory is “accomplishment” which is the pleasure to achieve certain goals, and finally, “Stimulation”, the pleasure gained when they perform the task. 1.1.2.2.2 Goal Theories The two influential goal theories in studying motivation have been introduced are goal setting theories and goal orientation theory. The former was developed by Locke and Latham (1990). As stated in the theory, goals have two aspects namely internal and external. The internal aspects of the goals are the ideas that guide the goal obtaining process and the conditions sought for refer to the external aspect of the goals. Figure 2: General Model of Goal Setting Theory Source: Lunenburg (2011) 10 The theory assumes that there are two “cognitive determinants of behavior”: values and intentions (goals). And a goal is defined as what the individual is consciously trying to do, which helps motivate people to perform at the required levels to achieve the set goals. What’s more, attaining the goal can result in satisfaction and further motivation; meanwhile, failure to accomplish may lead to frustration and lower motivation. Relations among the characteristics of the goals can be utilized to enhance the motivation for learners. Firstly, goals should be specific: the more specific, the better. Research states that specific goals could result in desirable organizational goals, such as “reducing absenteeism, tardiness and turnover” (Locke & Latham, 2002). Secondly, the more difficult the goal is, the greater the sense of achievement it brings about. And the third feature is commitment. High commitment can be obtained if an individual believed in an important and achievable goal. The second theory is goal orientation theory in academic settings which distinguishes between mastery and performance orientation. Students may adopt different goals in their learning environment. According to Fryer and Elliot (2008), goal is defined as “what a person plans to do in a particular achievement situation”. And (Ames, 1992) stated that goal orientations identified the way students “approach, engage in, and respond to learning activities”, as cited by Sakiz (2011). Sakiz also pointed out the revelation by several researchers that the set goals affect students’ motivation, emotion, strategy, utilization, learning, academic behaviors, and achievement. According to this theory, students who set the former goal focus on increasing their knowledge and their capability, aiming to master the task itself and are able to pursue challenging tasks. Another subcategory is performance goals. Different from the first type, learners with this type of goal mainly concern showing their ability in comparison with other’s performance. Williams (1997: 131) wrote: “Put simply, with performance goals, an individual aims to look smart, whereas with the learning goals, the individual aims to becoming smarter”. While students with mastery goal orientation may attribute their success or failure to controlling internal factor, those setting performance goal tend to blame the external elements such as luck, task difficulty for their failure. (Dweck, 1986). 11 In general, it has been studied that mastery oriented students tend to concentrate more on development and understanding. Such learners adopt more effective learning strategies and would be engaged in more challenging tasks. Meanwhile performance oriented students invest more effort on doing better than others, wishing to attract public recognition, compliment, and they employ less effective learning strategies and as well as prefer easy tasks. For example, mastery oriented learners wish to master the subject matter and acquire new knowledge and while students adopting performance approach goals tend to do to be recognized by others. 1.1.2.2.3. Attribution Theories This was an influential theory in the 1980’s. To put it simply, this theory is about how people explain things or why things happened. According to William and Burden (1997), the theory is not based on the experiences people have but it looks into how the experiences are “perceived”. For example within academic contexts, students may attribute their “locus of causality” (failure or success) to a wide variety of reasons, which falls into two subcategories, namely external and internal attribution, which means they see themselves or others as the causes. An external attribution accuses something outside of motivating the event while internal attribution ascribes the causality to factors within a person, meaning the people themselves are directly responsible for the failure or success. The attribution theory proved significant in classroom environment because it relates to motivation for language learning. If a student attributes his failure to the uncontrollable internal factors, let’s say lack of ability, and then the motivation may easily decline or even disappear. While he/ she ascribes the failure to the controllable internal factors, for instance, his or her laziness, the motivation is likely to be improved without difficulty. Nonetheless, there were not many studies regarding this theory since quantitative is not easily applicable in such cases. There were to major findings drawn using qualitative studies. Uslu (2013) summarized the findings in his studies that Ushioda (1996b) utilized attribution theory to explain the “attribution patterns” in Irish learners of French and found that learners referred the achievements to personal abilities and the failure to unstable shortcomings. 12