Can You Motivate the Unmotivated: Male University Students in Saudi Arabia - Case Study Example

?Can You Motivate The Unmotivated? A Case Study of Male in Saudi Arabia ] Students in Saudi Arabia are faced with a lot of problems studying in a language other than their first language (L1). “No Arabic” is the famous classroom rule in the kingdom of Saudi Arabia, whereby students are restricted to speak in their native language in the classroom activities, so all they are left with is their second language (L2) (Jenkins, 2012). This presents the many problems they face with EFL when students to learn & study in English in their own native country, and ESL when students migrate to a native English speaking country for higher studies. This phenomenon has introduced the rule of ‘No Arabic Speaking’ in the Saudi Arabia where students are prohibited from the use of L1 in everyday classroom activities, as the teachers and proponents of this rule believe that the active use of L1 may inhibit the proper and quick learning of L2. This leads to poor motivation in those students and difficulties in learning and acquiring the second language in its true spirit. So the question tends to be whether the restricted use of L1 assists in or inhibits the proper acquisition and learning of the second language, in short if it is an asset or a liability. This paper sheds some light on the motivation theories and their application with respect to the problem in discussion, and tries to review the monolingual practices in order to help such students in developing positive attitudes towards the target language, so that they can be highly motivated to acquire L2 in its true meaning thereby enabling them to lay a firm foundation for speaking and writing in L2. In order to evaluate the issue under consideration, we will first look at the recent research works and studies about L2 motivation as a second language (in a foreign environment) or foreign language (in a native English-speaking country). For the analysis of the problem I have selected a few articles, journals, and other related literary documents to accumulate knowledge and to establish well-grounded theoretical context and conceptual framework for the paper. So this paper can also serve as a comprehensive summary of the relevant studies which comprise, for example Cle?ment & Gardner, 2001; Do ?rnyei, 2001a, 2001c; and MacIntyre, 2002. Hence, instead of restating what has already been very well described in the articles and journals selected for the anthology, I have tried to evaluate the answers to the question under study from various standpoints, highlighting their importance and trying to establish the connections with other approaches to the problem. In trying to understand the acquisition of L2 as a language we need to see it not just as a subject, but as a deeply social and cultural event; and that’s what makes language learning different from other academic subjects. The elements of language learning as a subject include the understanding of lexical terms, vocabulary and grammatical rules; whereas it is also socially bound requiring the language learner to integrate several elements of the culture of the second language (Gardner, 1979 and Williams, 1994). L2 motivation researchers have widely supported this approach, which has led to the inclusion of social and cultural dimension in the language learning and studies. This has also introduced the concepts of multiculturalism, language globalization, power relations between different cultures and social groups in the study of L2 motivation. This, in fact, also explains why it was the social psychologists who first initiated the researches into L2 motivation. The first comprehensive study of L2 motivated was initiated by Robert Gardner and Wallace Lambert in 1972. They viewed language learning as a means of reconciling differences between different cultures and social groups. According to them, for intercultural communication and association to take place, “motivation” to learn the language of others is the primary driving force. It enables us to understand others and take actions. “Integrative” aspect is the most important and distinctive element of Gardner’s motivation theory. In essence, the integrative motivational orientation means a tendency to be affected to and be like the prominent personalities of the L2 group. It also includes a desire to interact with the members of that group, and also respect for other social groups. This can be summed up as some kind of psychological and emotional “identification” with the L2 group. This identification according to the Gardener (2001) concerns identifying and interacting with the speakers of the second language, which is why, we may say, a person quickly learns and starts speaking in the second language while living in the cultural environment of that language. But such an environment is highly unlikely in a school or college setting (unless it’s a highly diversified multi-cultural school setting). Do?rnyei (1990) contended that in the absence of the L2 group or native language speakers within the learner’s environment (which is most likely the case for students learning L2 as a part of their course syllabus), the “identification” can be provided in the form of cultural and rational values that are related to that language. For example, we can see the powerful integrative motive and high motivation to learn English language among Chinese people in mainland China, who most probably do not interact with any native English speakers most of their lives. Hence, this integrative motive is one of the most decisive factors in motivating an individual to learn a second language. The above mentioned theory of Gardner was based on the social psychological studies, the grounds of which were laid down in 1960s. During the subsequent years several researches were presented as a result of cognitive revolution in the field of psychology. As a result several cognitive motivation theories were presented, and soon enough the L2 researches started utilizing these theories for L2 motivation. Attribution theory, self-determination theory, and goal theories are three of such influential motivational models that attempt to outline such cognitive approach. SELF-DETERMINATION THEORY This was presented by Deci & Ryan’s (1985, 2002) and it has been one of the most important and powerful theories in the motivational psychology. Recently, Kim Noels along with her coauthors, Luc Pelletier & Robert Vallerand, who are well-known scholars of motivational psychology, have been defending the application of self-determination theory to L2 motivation (Noels, Clement, & Pelletier, 1999, 2001; Vallerand et al. 2000). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations are the two main concepts introduced by and related to the self-determination theory of motivation. During past the relation of these terms with other L2 motivation concepts such as integrative orientation have not been demonstrated. Noels et al. (2000) has provided how these concepts fit into the field of L2 motivation through reliable measuring instruments to assess the many elements of self-determination theory that have a role in motivating an individual to learn L2. The second study by Noels attempts to describe the relationship between student autonomy and communication style of L2 teachers. This relation of student autonomy with L2 motivation has also been seconded by several other authors and researchers like, Humphreys, Spratt et al. (2002) and Ushioda (1996). ATTRIBUTION THEORY Attribution theory of motivation challenged the classical motivational principle of Atkinson about achievement motivation theory. Due to this, attribution theory has a unique status among. It also proved to be an influential approach to address the l2 motivation among the students in later years. This theory attempt to associate our past experience in some task to our future motivation and subsequent efforts to achieve that purpose. The main advocate of this theory Bernard Weiner (1992) argues that our attitudes, orientation and motivations substantially shape our motivational inclination. To view it in a simple way, consider an example. If we associate our past failure in doing anything to a low abiklity on our own part, it’s quite unlikely that we will ever try that task again. However, if we associate our failure to the incorrect learning strategies or insufficient efforts on our part, we are likely to try that task in future as well. All around the world, millions of people have failed to have a command in second language; a lot of people have failed which provides this theory a good ground for L2 motivation among the learners. Some others researchers like Williams & Burden (1999) have also clarified this approach. GOAL THEORY Goals are typically referred in the language learning as “Orientations”. Tremblay and Gardner’s (1995) proposed in their motivation model the concept of “goal salience” as the major component of L2 motivation. Other than the Goal-Setting Theory, L2 motivational studies and educational psychology has hardly adopted any other goal theories. Hence, there is a possibility for research and development in this area. As it has been recently concluded by Pintrich & Schunk (2002, p. 242) that, “Currently, it is probably the most active area of research on student motivation in classrooms and it has direct implications for students and teachers.” L2 MOTIVATION AND NEUROBIOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENT After the adoption of mainstream motivation theories to L2 studies, the advances in neurobiology and the technological developments that made brain and neuroimaging possible and far more apprehensible opened the path to a whole new and different line of research in L2 and motivational studies. This revolutionized the field of psychological investigation. In late 1990s, John Schumann initiated the neurological probe of the brain mechanisms involved in second language learning. This is very important for our L2 and language learning aspect, as L2 motivation was the first aspect examined by Schumann which resulted in a fascinating theory of motivation. “Stimulus appraisal” is the main component of Schumann’s theory. Stimulus appraisal occurs in brain in five dimensions, as follows: Novelty (which is the level of familiarity or unfamiliarity) Pleasantness (which leads to attraction and fascination) Goal significance/Valence (whether the goals or the ending result will be instrumental in satisfying the individual’s needs or requirements) Coping potential (can individual handle the circumstances); and Self- and social image (is individual’s self-image compatible with the surrounding events). Schumann demonstrated that the stimulus appraisal becomes a part of the person’s feedback value system through the “memory for value” module. Therefore the abovementioned dimensions of the stimulus appraisals are largely responsible for any individual action and motivation. LEARNING STRATEGY AND MOTIVATION As a part of learning, student often apply certain strategies to aid them in the learning process. These are referred to as the learning strategies and can be referred to as a instances reinforcing the motivated earning behavior. Systematic studies of relation between the L2 motivation and the use of language learning strategy was conducted in mid 1990s by Richard Schmidt. After the results of these studies have been obtained Schmidt and Watanabe (2001) have conducted a research aimed at finding the correlation between the students’ learning behavior and their motivational disposition. They obtained data from over 2000 Hawaiian universities. Another major study was focused on British school children. It was conducted by Williams, Burden, and Lanvers (2002) who concluded that “most participants appeared to have great difficulty in discussing different aspects of their metacognitive strategy use and conveyed a lack of sense of control over their learning… Very little evidence was found of planning behavior” (p. 519). MOTIVATION OF LANGUAGE TEACHERS AND INSTRUCTORS Due to the developments in social psychology and enhanced knowledge of classroom realities, recently some attraction has been drawn to one of the most neglected areas of motivation – the motivation among the educators and teachers. The motivation level of a teacher is, with no doubt, is an important factor in deciding the interest of individual and his/her motivational disposition towards leaning a second language. However, surprisingly the amount of motivation in this area of studies is very deficient in quality and quantity. There is a wide implication of research conducted in this area and the foundations have already been laid, but there is a wide room for investigation into details. Something along the lines of “scientifically validated ways to motivate language teachers” has not been studied and could be very useful and practicable. READING MOTIVATION Reading is one of the most important components of communication. Ris often one of the most basic skills that students acquire (accompanied with writing, speaking and listening) while learning a new language. Learning a new language often starts with reading in that language. However, compared to the hefty amount of literature available in the motivation to interact with others in a foreign language, only a meager amount of research and studies are found for motivation for reading in a foreign language. Setsuko Mori (2002) in “Redefining Motivation to Read in a Foreign Language” has presented a very extensive research study about the reading motivation. According to the journal article the data for this study, “The data for this study was obtained from an original questionnaire, which largely drew upon Wigfield and Guthrie's (1995, 1997) theory of reading motivation in L1. The results of a statistical analysis suggest that motivation to read in English may be divided into four sub-components, namely: Intrinsic Value of Reading in English Attainment Value of Reading in English Extrinsic Utility Value of Reading in English, and Expectancy for Success in Reading in English.” (Setsuko Mori, 2002, pp. 01) This main basis for the study is the reading motivation theory of L1 as put forward by Wigfield & Guthrie in 1995. This may raise questions and doubts about the validity of the study concentrated on the reading in second language. But the article communicates that the theory of first language was used instead of second language because of lack of theories available on L2 motivation aside from those from Day & Bamford (1998). Guthrie & Wigfield tried to conceive their theory on the basis of the possibility that motivation may be “domain-specific” in students; meaning that motivation may be different for reading in English. Wigfield and Guthrie based their motivation model for reading on some of the most basic and general psychological theories of reading motivation. Expectancy Theory is one of the most influential theories among thse. According to the Expectancy theory, an individual decides how much efforts he/she is going to put in any task according to two factors: Valence – which is the value of reward in the eyes of the individual Expectancy – which is the possibility or expectation of success in a given task according to the individual himself. These two factors combine to form the force of motivation. For example, a difficulty in doing some task may negatively affect the expectancies for success in that task, whereas an individual’s anticipation of their capabilities in doing a task is related to the expectancies for success in a positive manner. The proponents further contended that a student’s ability in mastering a language depends on their past experience in that language and how they interpret outlook and attitudes of others in their classroom. “Eccles and Wigfield (1995) hypothesize that the value the individual associates with success in that task consists of four components: Attainment Value, Intrinsic Value, Extrinsic Utility Value, and Cost. Attainment value refers to the individual's perception of importance of success in a given task. Intrinsic value refers to enjoyment that task engagement brings about whereas extrinsic utility value refers to the usefulness of the task… Cost is defined as the perceived negative consequences of engaging in the task… (This may include, for example,) extended effort, time and emotional expenditures” (Setsuko Mori, 2002, pp. 03) According to the article, the findings of the study designed to investigate whether the motivation of foreign language reading is dependent on the general motivational constructs is valid or not, does not support this hypothesis. Instead the reading motivation more represents the general motivation patterns put forward by the expectancy theory. The article also suggests that more research is needed in verifying this point and in order to establish relationship between reading behavior and reading motivation (Setsuko Mori, 2002, pp. 19). CHALLENGES FACED BY SAUDI STUDENTS From day one in the school, Saudi students face a number of challenges trying to learn English as an L2 (EFL and ESL). In many schools and colleges the use of Arabic as L1 is considered unacceptable as it supposedly hinders the learning of English as L2. Use of L1 is mostly considered a negative classroom practice and students can even be penalized for their use of Arabic in classroom activities. According to Phillipson (1992), this type of pedagogic behavior can compromise the way in which student’s think and shape their identity. Always censuring the use of L1 in the classroom also sends the message that the language itself, and not just language, but the L1 culture as well, is not acceptable. Whilst this pedagogic practice may be considered acceptable by some cultural standards and norms, some cultures may view it as an English invasion and a means of retarding local identity (Kubota 2002). Some people see the learning of English as L2 as merely for educational and instrumental purposes while maintaining their local heritage and cultural norms and values (Jenkins 2008). Also, once the local language is banned from the classroom, it is harder (especially for lower grade students) to express their views and feelings in the L2 classroom setting as they are not much familiar with the new language. As a result of this they are unable to contribute and participate in the classroom activities which results in boredom and may even the loss of interest in studies. Hence demotivation results from not being able to have full command in the foreign language (Do?rnyei 2001). Students, especially those in lower grades, who have always communicated in their native L1, have all of their life experiences and cultural awareness in their local language. So L1 is the only reference point for them. Thus, in this monolingual situation, if they are presented with some content in L2, it would be very hard for them to form a reality based on their very limited understanding of L2. In such cases student’s try to translate the words and phrases in their native language to get the total grasp of the language instead of trying to understand the true meaning of the content. This may hinder the learning practices and even demotivate students to learn L2. So the essential connection between the foreign language and past experience learnt in l1 are difficult to be formed by these students. As students struggle to make these connections, they find the process of new language acquisition very difficult and demotivating. So this method of teaching English as foreign language is very unproductive and makes the learning environment a little more uninteresting which may make the student feel bored. Students learning English as a foreign language within Saudi Arabia has an advantage over those learning it as a Second language in some native English-speaking country. Almost all the students in such ESL classes are homogenous and familiar and sufficiently competent in L1 (Arabic). Thus L1 can be used as a useful tool to provide motivation to the students and a useful means of communication. Similarly for learners at lower grades, it can help them to develop new meanings and explanations in L2 by activating the prior knowledge and experience in L1. Thus it can be said that the inclusion of L1 in day to day EFL classroom activities and communication in the class is completely normal and should not be discouraged. Teachers should realize that L1 is an integral part of students’ life, their identity and the culture to which they belong. So as Cummins suggested “we need to investigate pedagogical ways of incorporating, not alienating L1” (Jenkins, 2012, pp. 03). So L1 should be used in productive ways to make the language learning process less intimidating. MOTIVATION IN LEARNING LANGUAGE FROM A CULTURAL PERSPECTIVE Various studies have shown that the students who are most quick and motivated to learn a new language in ESL and EFL contexts are those who possess high level of integrative or intrinsic motivation, which means to say that they admire the culture of the target language, like the people speaking that language, inspire from the dominant personalities of that culture and wish to integrate into the target society without any difficulty. To quote Lambert, an integrative orientation means a desire to learn the target language due to "a sincere and personal interest in the people and culture represented by the other language group" (1976: pp. 98). Conversely, instrumental motivation means the interest of students in learning L2 when it is going to bring him/her benefits such as a good academic career, better job etc. However, besides motivation, people belonging to different culture react differently to leaning new language. Hence, the level and type of motivation that the students may develop while learning new language may depend on the context and culture in which they interact. Raghad Dwaik and Adnan Shehadeh (2010) conducted a study which is mentioned in their article “Motivation Types among EFL College Students: Insights from the Palestinian Context” in which they studied the motivation patterns of different EFL student in Hebron, Palestine. “Sample of the study consisted of 127 students majoring in English and Engineering at Hebron University and Palestine Polytechnic University respectively” (Dwaik and Shehadeh, 2010, pp. 01). The main objective of this study was to assess the influence of various factors such as education level, required technique and competence, gender & other major subjects on the level of their motivation. The participants answered a questionnaire and took an interview. The result of their study has shown that the Palestinian students do not exhibit the types of motivation pattern that are demonstrated in classical motivation studies carried on migrants in the native countries. Extrinsic motivation is most prevalent among the Palestinian students. For example, they learn the language simple because it’s an academic syllabus requirement or in order to protect their own culture from others’ influence. The participants in the student shave not shown integrative or intrinsic motivations which are most effective in influencing high motivation levels among the language learners. Hence the researchers recommend enduing serious efforts in increasing the intrinsic motivation among the EFL learners in Palestine. The above-mentioned article also enlightens the various researches carried on different Arab learners of EFL and ESL in the field of motivation. These are discussed below. Kuwait Studies Al-Shalabi (1982) investigated motivation in Kuwaiti university students. He found that there was a presence of strong instrumental motivation among the majority of these students. Al-Mutawa (1994) also conducted a study of one thousand and thirty secondary schools in Kuwait & found that 75% of them believed that EFL could provide the means of trying to understand the foreign culture. Saudi Studies Alam (1988) explored the goal orientation in EFL among a group of Saudi students. Most of the students were of the view that they pursue English as a language because of its requirement in business world and higher studies. Studies conducted by Dhaif Allah in 2005 showed slightly different results in middle school Saudi students; in which the students’ motivation patterns were both instrumental and integrative. UAE Studies The studies mentioned above are in correspondence with the conclusions drawn by Musa (1985) who surveyed 357 UAE students. More than three-fourth of these students believed that they pursue English because of its global importance in communication and as a language of instruction in most graduate programs. CONCLUSION This review has tried to present various stimulating former and recent studies in the field of L2 motivation. There is a lot of interesting research work going on in this field and hopefully these studies combined with other lines of psychological and related studies is likely to take the L2 motivation to a whole new level of maturity. The results presented and the work done by these studies is highly valuable to linguistic scientists, teachers and learners of language because of the rich source data on the components of motivation in learning L2. A lot of researchers incl. Gardner & Schumann argue that the most successful students in acquiring the the new language are those who admire the target culture, like its people and have the desire to become associate with the culture. Whilst some cultures may show a high tendency to learn English as a foreign language, others may readily reject its integration into their own culture. As seen from the results on the Arab and Palestinian studies, many students seem to have a genuine desire to distant themselves from the target culture instead of integrating with it. Another important consideration is the use of L1 as primary and motivating language among the EFL colleges. Its use in everyday classes should not be discouraged as it may result in demotivation of the students. Instead L1 should be properly utilized and managed so that it helps learners in acquiring the target language easily. Hence it is a joint responsibility of educators, students and policy makers to develop a positive attitude towards the language and target culture. REFERENCES Alam, M. A. Hussein, S. M. & Khan, B. A. (1988). "A Study of the Attitudes of Students, Teachers and Parents towards English as a Foreign Language in Saudi Arabian Public Schools". Saudi Arabia, Ministry of Education, Educational Development; the General Directorate of Research and Evaluation. Al-Mutawa, N. (1994). "Factors influencing English Language Teaching and Learning in the Secondary Schools of Kuwait". Educational Sciences (Institute of Educational Studies, Cairo University). 1(2). 33-62. Al-Shalabi, F. (1982). "Perceived Social Distance: a Reexamination of an Attitudinal Factor in anEFL Setting". Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, Colorado Univeristy. Cle?ment, R., & Gardner, R. C. (2001). Second language mastery. In W. P. Robinson & H. Giles (Eds.),The new handbook of language and social psychology(pp. 489–504). Chichester, England: Wiley & Sons. Cummins, J.2009. ‘Multilingualism in the English-language classroom: pedagogical considerations’. TESOLQuarterly43/2: 317–21. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985).Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. New York: Plenum. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (Eds.). (2002).Handbook of self-determination. Rochester, NY: University of Rochester Press. Dhaif-Allah, A. (2005). "An exploration of Saudi Students' Integrative and Instrumental Motivation for Learning English". In Occasional Papers in the Development of English Language Education. 39. 55-113. Cairo: ASU. Do?rnyei, Z. (1990). Conceptualizing motivation in foreign language learn-ing. Language Learning. Do?rnyei, Z.2001.Motivational Strategies in the Language Classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Do?rnyei, Z. (2003) Attitudes, Orientations, and Motivations in Language Learning: Advances in Theory, Research, and Applications: Wiley-Blackwell. Do?rnyei, Z. et al. (2006) Motivation, Language Attitudes and Globalisation: AHungarian Perspective. Working Papers in TESOL & Applied Linguistics, 2007, Vol. 7, No.1 Dwaik, R. & Shehadeh A. (2010) Motivation Types among EFL CollegeStudents: Insights from the Palestinian Context. An-Najah Univ. J. of Res. (Humanities) Vol. 24(1) pp. 01. Gardner, R. C. (2001). Integrative motivation and second language acquisi-tion. In Z. Do ?rnyei & R. Schmidt (Eds.),Motivation and second language learning(pp. 1–20). Honolulu, HI: University of Hawai‘i Press. Jenkins, S. (2012) Monolingualism: an uncongenial policy for Saudi Arabia’s low-level learners. Kubota, R.2002. ‘The impact of globalization on language teaching in Japan’ in D. Block and D. Cameron (eds.).Globalization and Language Teaching. London: Routledge. Lambert, W. (1974). "Culture and language as factors in learning and education' in F. Abboud and Meade (eds.), Cultural Factors in Learning and Education (pp. 91-122). Bellingham, WA: Fifth Western Washington Symposium on Learning. Mori, S. (2002) Redefining Motivation to Read in a Foreign Language. Reading in a Foreign Language, Volume 14, pp. 1, 3, 19. Musa, M. (1985). "Why do not our students speak English fluently after eight years of study?". Journal of Education (UAE). 38. 67-72. Phillipson, R.1992.Linguistic Imperialism: Oxford University Press. Pintrich, P. R., & Schunk, D. H. (2002).Motivation in education: Theory, research, and applications (2nd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Schmidt, R., & Watanabe, Y. (2001). Motivation, strategy use, and ped-agogical preferences in foreign language learning. In Z. Do?rnyei & R. Schmidt (Eds.),Motivation and second language acquisition(pp. 313–359). Honolulu, HI: University of Hawai‘i Press. Schumann, J. H. (1998).The neurobiology of affect in language. Oxford, England: Blackwell. Spratt, M., Humphreys, G., & Chan, V. (2002). Autonomy and motivation: Which comes first? Language Teaching Research, 6, pp. 245–266. Tremblay, P. F., & Gardner, R. (1995). Expanding the motivation construct in language learning. Modern Language Journal, 79, 505–518. Ushioda, E. (1996).Learner autonomy 5: The role of motivation. Dublin, Ireland: Authentik Weiner, B. (1992).Human motivation: Metaphors, theories and research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Wigfield, A. & Guthrie, J. T. (1995). Dimensions of children's motivations for reading: An initial study (Research Rep. No. 34). Athens, GA: National Reading Research Center. Wigfield, A. & Guthrie J. T. (1997). Relations of children's motivation for reading to the amount and breadth of their reading. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89, 420-432. Williams, M., Burden, R. L., & 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, 503–528. Read More