國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
CHAPTER FIVE CONCLUSION
This chapter contains three sections: the summary of the major findings, the pedagogical implications for practical application, and the limitations of the study.
Summary of Major Findings
The purpose of the present study is to find out whether the test-question preview worksheets could help promote the participants’ English learning motivation in a test-oriented learning environment. Furthermore, the study investigates whether the participants with the aid of the worksheets could have better English academic performance than those not using the worksheets. The conclusions are presented by answering the two research questions.
The first research question looks into the effects of the worksheet learning upon the participants’ three motivational components, namely competence perception, autonomy and relatedness, under a test-oriented learning environment. The results suggest that the worksheets may help promote the high achievers’ autonomy for learning English but have no apparent influence upon their competence perception and relatedness with their
classmates and the teacher. The t-test results showed that the high achievers tended to adopt autonomous attitude in learning English after the use of the worksheets (t=-2.967, p=0.021<0.05), but the other two motivational components remained similar. The little change in the mean scores of the questionnaire items on competence perception and relatedness also indicated that the high achievers didn’t feel they gained more sense of achievement either from their success experiences or from the teacher’s affirmation during the worksheet learning. Moreover, the worksheets were unable to motivate them to interact with their classmates and the teacher more often. The qualitative data from the
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
worksheets also supported these findings. According to the high achievers’ responses and feedback on the worksheets, it was discovered that they adopted various learning
strategies to prepare for the test questions, attributed their success to effort and failure to carelessness and found the ways to improve their English during the worksheet learning.
These learning behaviors indicate that their autonomy for learning English is supported.
However, most of them had success and failure experiences in the tests, and some of them thought the test questions were too easy. Besides, only three of them expressed
thankfulness toward the teacher for her help in the feedback. These all suggest that, for the high achievers, the support for competence perception and relatedness with others may not be effective.
As for the middle group, the worksheets seem to benefit their English learning motivation the most. According to the paired-samples t-test results, there was a significant improvement in the middle achievers’ relatedness with their classmates and the teacher (t=-2.270, p=0.041<0.05). Though the other two components, competence perception and autonomy, didn’t show apparent improvement based on the t-test results, the mean scores of the questionnaire items on competence perception and most of the autonomy items increased after the worksheet learning. The qualitative data collected from the open questions on the worksheets also suggest that the middle achievers’ three motivational components may be supported by the worksheet learning. As shown in the data, most of the middle achievers used different learning strategies to study for the test questions on the worksheets and ascribed their success to effort and failure to carelessness. Some of them pointed out that they learned some useful learning strategies from the worksheets and identified their weaknesses in English. Besides, they became more confident when facing the upcoming tests, and their success in achieving their goals increased their sense of achievement. Most of them also expressed that they learned some vocabulary and grammatical structures from the worksheets. Furthermore, almost the whole group had
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
the experiences of discussing the test questions with their classmates and the teacher.
They also showed their gratitude toward their helpers. These responses and feedback all indicate that the worksheets may support the middle group’s three motivational
components.
The worksheet learning does not have similar positive effects on the low group. The t-test results showed that their autonomy for learning English decreased significantly (t=3.325, p=0.013<0.05) after the treatment. Also, the mean scores of most of the questionnaire items on the three motivational components decreased, reflecting that the low achievers’ English learning motivation may not be promoted by the worksheet learning. The qualitative data gathered from the worksheets also present similar findings.
The data showed that not many of the low achievers adopted various learning strategies to prepare for the test questions on the worksheets. The two most-used strategies,
previewing the test questions and searching for the answers to the questions from the textbook, were the ones that didn’t take much time and energy and had little interaction with others. Only few of them actively used the strategy, discussing the test questions with others, and this may explain why there was no one in the low group expressing thankfulness toward the teacher for her help. Furthermore, some of the low achievers tended to set easy goals or give up English learning tasks directly. Those who had given a try often felt frustrated because their effort didn’t bring them their anticipated learning results. Three of the low achievers directly pointed out that the test questions were too hard for them to answer. Thus, most of them had failure experiences in the tests. Besides, none of them stated that they learned a useful learning strategy to improve their English from the worksheets. These responses all suggest that the worksheets may not help promote the low achievers’ autonomy for learning English, competence perception and relatedness with others.
The second research question inquires into whether the experimental group could
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
outperform those without the aid of the worksheets. The results suggest that the
worksheets may have little influence upon the participants’ academic performance on a school-administered English achievement test. According to the independent samples t-test results, there wasn’t any significant difference found in the test performances between the experimental and the control groups. It was probably because that the worksheets didn’t cover all the questions tested in the English achievement test. They only focused on establishing the participants’ linguistic knowledge (i.e. vocabulary and grammatical structures) but left out other abilities, like the ability of translation and reading comprehension, which were also tested in the English achievement test. In addition, students’ misguidance in the discussions over the test questions on the worksheets may also lead to mistakes on the English achievement test. Last, the
worksheets only provided limited test questions for the participants to practice. Therefore, the worksheets could not exert significant effects upon the participants’ academic
performance.
Pedagogical Implications
Learning English in a test-oriented learning environment, like junior high schools in Taiwan, may gradually decrease students’ motivation to learn English. Students tend to become passive learners because their learning behaviors are controlled by tests. Deci, Pelletier and Ryan (1991) proposed that if the context could provide the support for the three human inherent needs, namely competence7, autonomy and relatedness, more self-determined motivation could be developed. Thus, teachers may need to support the three basic needs of their students by designing some learning activities or supplements, like worksheets, so as to motivate them to learn English. The present study suggests making use of tailor-made worksheets in the hope of achieving this goal.
7 The present study focuses on promoting the participants’ competence perception.
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
For the purpose of ensuring the effectiveness of the worksheets, several suggestions of designing the worksheets are given. First, teachers can place test questions on the worksheets for students to preview. By doing so, students’ test pressure and anxiety would be reduced and their attention would be drawn to looking for the answers to those
questions instead of worrying about their performances on the tests.
Second, to provide relatedness support, teachers can design some open questions that encourage students to discuss test questions or assignments with their classmates and teachers. Leading them to express gratitude toward their helpers and state the reasons why they feel thankful is also a good way to increase students’ relatedness with each other and with their teachers. Furthermore, teachers may need to be supportive and encouraging to students so as to create a positive and secure relationship with them. It would help increase students’ motivation to interact with their teachers actively. In addition, the worksheets can provide access for students and teachers to exchange their feedback and feelings. Both students’ relatedness with teachers and autonomy for learning could be enhanced through understanding each other and feeling being concerned by teachers.
Third, it should be cautioned that low achievers may suffer from a strong sense of helplessness, which would make them easily give up their learning and refuse others’ help.
They need more attendance and assistance from their teachers and classmates so that their English learning motivation can be promoted. Teachers can design attainable learning tasks for them to do (Brophy, 2010). Besides, offering them with remedial classes to build up the necessary English competence for learning new English material, and encouraging their classmates to be their personal tutors may be more helpful than simply handing them the worksheets to learn on their own.
Last, in order to help students have better academic performances, teachers can do the following things. For example, teachers can encourage students to discuss the test questions with more than one of their classmates or with their teacher to avoid the
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
chances of being misguided. And teachers may need to make sure the exercises on the worksheets are sufficient for students to familiarize themselves with the newly-leaned English material. If there is a need, teachers can give additional exercises for students to practice. Furthermore, the worksheets could involve some requirements that urge students to spend time reviewing the worksheets before an English test. Thus, they wouldn’t make the same mistakes as they made on the worksheets. By doing so, the worksheets would be more effective in helping students learn and perform better at school.
Limitations of the Study
There are several limitations of the present study that need to be further investigated.
The first limitation is the small sample size of the research. There were only 30 students in the experimental and the control groups participating in the empirical study.
Furthermore, when they were further divided into three subgroups (i.e. high, middle and low groups), both the experimental and the control classes contained only eight students in the high group, fourteen students in the middle group, and eight students in the low group. The small number of the participants in each subgroup may be problematic in applying the paired-samples and independent-samples t-tests for conducting
within-group/subgroup and between-groups/subgroups comparisons.
Second, the amount of time spent on the experiment is too short. Within the seven weeks, the experimental group only used three test-question preview worksheets on three English lessons in their school textbook. Thus, the study results may not completely represent the effectiveness of the test-question preview worksheets on students’ English learning motivation.
Third, the experimental and control groups’ competence perception and relatedness with their classmates and the teacher were different before the worksheet treatment based on the independent-samples t-test results (See Table 4.1). This may cause further
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
statistical problems, if the study intends to compare the two groups’ three motivation components after the treatment. Therefore, the present study focused on in-group
comparisons by means of paired-samples t-test. The analysis helps to clarify the effect of the worksheet on the experimental group.
Fourth, the English learning motivation questionnaire and the test-question preview worksheets may not be comprehensive enough to represent the three motivational components, namely competence perception, autonomy and relatedness. The principles that were adopted to design the questionnaire and the worksheets were only concluded from a small number of studies relevant to the support of the three motivational components. It is thus recommended that more relevant studies could be involved and taken as references to develop a set of principles that are more comprehensive for devising the questionnaire and the worksheets.
Last, the test questions and assignments on the worksheets mainly focus on vocabulary and grammatical structures, which couldn’t cover all the knowledge and abilities examined in the school-administered English achievement test. In addition, when comparing the test scores gained from the experimental and control groups with
independent-samples t-test, the comparison didn’t focus on comparing the scores gained from the vocabulary and grammar test sections but on the overall scores of the test. Thus, the statistical results may not fully reflect the effect of the worksheets upon students’
English academic performances (targeted on linguistic knowledge).
Suggestions for Future Research
The research findings of the present study were limited in several ways that could be further investigated in future studies.
First, future research can be conducted on a larger number of participants in both experimental and control groups so that the statistical results of the empirical study would
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
be more valid. Also, future studies can try other inferential statistics, like nonparametric statistics, which can reduce the possible influence of a small sample size upon study results.
Second, future researchers could lengthen the treatment time. In this way, the
test-question preview worksheets would have more time to exert their effects on students’
English learning motivation.
Third, further research may be needed in this area, to observe the development of students’ English learning motivation or any of its components after students stop using the test-question preview worksheets. It may provide the information on the independent development of English learning motivation after the use of the worksheets.
Fourth, it is recommended that the principles utilized to design the English learning motivation questionnaire and the test-question preview worksheets can be made more complete through more comprehensive literature review. By doing so, future studies can have a more solid theoretical foundation and provide more valid and convincing study results.
At last, the influence of the test-question preview worksheets on students’ language anxiety could be added to further research. It has been reported that learning effectiveness may be impaired if students suffer too much apprehension during their learning (Horwitz, 2001). Therefore, whether the worksheet learning could help students release their
language anxiety and improve their English learning would be an area worth future studies.
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
References
Ames, C., & Archer, J. (1988). Achievement goals in the classroom: Students’ learning strategies and motivation processes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 260-267.
Ames, C. (1992). Classrooms: Goals, structures, and student motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84, 261-271.
Assor, A., Kaplan, H., Kanat-Maymon, Y., & Roth, G. (2005). Directly controlling teacher behaviors as predictors of poor motivation and engagement in girls and boys: The role of anger and anxiety. Learning and Instruction, 15, 397-413.
Atkinson, J. W. (1957). Motivational determinants of risk taking behavior. Psychological Review, 64, 359-372.
Ausubel, D. (1968). Educational psychology: A cognitive view. New York: Holt, Rinehart
& Winston.
Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: toward a unifying theory of behavioral change.
Psychological Review, 84, 191-215.
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: Social cognitive theory.
Englewood cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Bandura, A. (1993). Perceived self-efficacy in cognitive development and functioning.
Educational Psychologist, 28, 117-148.
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: Freeman.
Barker, G., & Graham, S. (1987). A developmental study of praise and blame as attributional cues. Journal of Educational Psychology, 79, 62-66.
Blackwell, L., Trzesniewski, & Dweck, C. (2007). Implicit theories of intelligence predict achievement across adolescent transition: A longitudinal study and an intervention.
Child development, 78, 246-263.
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
Brophy, J. (2010). Motivating Students to Learn (3rd ed.). New York: Routledge.
Brown, H. D. (2001). Teaching by Principles (2nd ed.). White Plains, NY: Pearson Education.
Butler, R. (1992). What young people want to know when; Effects of mastery and ability goals on interest in different kinds of social comparisons. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62(6), 934-943.
Chang, A., & Bordia, P. (2001). A multidimensional approach to the group
cohesion—group performance relationship. Small group Research, 32, 379-405.
Chang, Y. H. (2010). Group process and EFL learners’ motivation: A study of group dynamics in EFL classrooms. TESOL Quarterly, 44(1), 129-154.
Child, D. (1994). Psychology and the teacher (5th ed.). London: Cassell.
Clement, R., Dornyei, Z., & Noels, K., (1994). Motivation, self-confidence , and group cohesion in the foreign language classroom. Language Learning, 44(3), 417-448.
Covington, M. & Omelich, C. (1984). An empirical examination of Weiner’s critique of attribution research. Journal of Educational Psychology, 76, 1214-1225.
Deci, E., & Ryan, R. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. New York: Plenum.
Deci, E., Vallerand, R., Pelletier, L., & Ryan, R. (1991). Motivation and education:
the self-determination perspective. Educational Psychologist, 26(3/4), 325-346.
Deci, E., Eghrari, H., Patrick, B., & Leone, D. (1994). Facilitating internalization: The self-determination theory perspective. Journal of Personality, 62, 119-142.
Deci, E. & Ryan, R. (2000). The ―what‖ and ―why‖ of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11, 227-268.
Diener, C., & Dweck, C. (1978). An analysis of learned helplessness: Continuous changes in performance, strategy, and achievement cognitions following failure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36, 451-462.
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
Diener, C., & Dweck, C. (1980). An analysis of learned helplessness: II. The processing of success. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39, 940-952.
Doff, A. (1988). Teach English. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Dornyei, Z. (1994). Motivation and motivating in the foreign language classroom.
Modern Language Journal, 78(3), 273-284.
Dornyei, Z. (1990). Conceptualization motivation in foreign language learning. Language Learning, 40, 46-78.
Dornyei, Z. (2001). New themes and approaches in second language motivation research.
Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 21, 43-59.
Dweck, C. (1986). Motivational processes affecting learning. American Psychologist, 41, 1040-1048.
Dweck, C., & Leggett, E. (1988). A social-cognitive approach to motivation and personality. Psychological Review, 95, 256-273.
Dweck, C. & Molden. (2005). Self-theories: Their impact on competence motivation and acquisition. In A. Elliot & C. Dweck (Ed.), Handbook of competence and motivation (pp. 122-140). New York: Guilford.
Earley, P., & Lituchy, T. (1991). Delineating goal and efficacy effects: A test of three models. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76, 71-98.
Eccles, J., & Wigfield, A. (1995). In the mind of the actor: The structure of adolescents’
achievement task values and expectancy-related beliefs. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 21, 215-225.
Ehrman, M., & Dornyei, Z. (1998). Interpersonal dynamics in second language education: The visible and invisible classroom Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Eisenberger, R. (1992). Learned industriousness. Psychological Review, 99, 248-267.
Elliot, A., Faler, J., McGregor, H., Campbell, W., Sedikides, C., & Harackiewicz, J.
(2000). Competence valuation as a strategic intrinsic motivation process. Personality
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26, 780-794.
Elliot, A., & Church, M. (2003). A motivational analysis of defensive pessimism and self-handicapping. Journal of Personality, 71, 369-396.
Elliott, E., & Dweck, C. (1988). Goals: An approach to motivation and achievement.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 5-12.
Entwistle, N., & Tait, H. (1990). Approaches to learning, evaluations of teaching, and preferences for contrasting academic environments. Higher Education, 19, 169-194.
Evans, C. R., & Dion, K. L. (1991). Group cohesion and performance: A meta analysis.
Small Group Research, 22, 175-186.
Fang, Y. (2010). Perceptions of the computer-assisted writing program among EFL college learners. Educational Technology & Society, 13(3), 246-256.
Forsterling, F. (1985). Attributional retraining: A review. Psychological Bulletin, 98, 495-512.
Forsyth, D. R. (1990). Group dynamics (2nd ed.). Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.
Gardner, R. C. (1985). Social psychology and second language learning: The role of attitudes and motivation. London: Edward Arnold.
Good, C., Aronson, J., & Inzlicht, N. (2003). Improving adolescents’ standardized test performance: An intervention to reduce the effects of stereotype threat. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 24, 645-662.
Good, T., & Brophy, J. (1994). Looking in Classrooms (4th ed.). New York:
HarperCollins.
Graham, S. (1984). Communicating sympathy and anger to black and white children: The
Graham, S. (1984). Communicating sympathy and anger to black and white children: The