This chapter provides an overview of literature of the following variables (motivation and organizational citizenship behavior) and their relationships between each other in this study. First, each section reviews literature on each variable individually and followed by the relationship between and among variables. Finally, the developed hypotheses are stated in the relationship section.
English as a Medium of Instruction
From last decade, there are more and more higher education institutes paying attention on English as a medium of instruction (EMI) (Lueg & Leung, 2015). To enhance internationalization of education, EMI is broadly adopted into the curriculum of institutes (Doh, 2010). EMI includes a set of English-lectured subject courses into curriculum. The trigger for the development of EMI is not just for the ambition to attract international students to enroll in the programs but also for helping home country students to cultivate international perspectives and become competitive in the global job market (Chen & Kraklow, 2015).
There are seven reasons why introducing EMI is needed proposed by Coleman (2006).
First, Content and Language Integrating Learning (CLIL) refers to the approach called
“immersion training” which means use second language to teach the subjects and by using second language to study the content, participants would gradually acquire the second language. Second, desiring to reach internationalization is also one of the reasons. Third, creating a global environment, especially set English as a lingua franca, would attract
English is an international language now. Fourth, attracting international students and staff would help institutions to gain reputation since academic staff’s international careers are based on their abilities on teaching and publishing in English and students’ future careers
depend on their English proficiency. Thus, in this way, it can also attract investors to invest money on the research and development of institutes. Fifth, staff mobility states that it would not only recruit international students but also staff from all over the world. Sixth and seventh, since it would increase the reputation of the institutes and also train students to be more internationalized, the graduate employability would also be improved.
Being part of the global village, Taiwan has also followed the world trend towards internationalized education and has changed and grown within last decade. Different policies including using English as a medium of instruction have been promoted and implemented to change the higher education in Taiwan. Moreover, there is a common belief that adopting EMI to the curriculum would stimulate students’ motivation to study English and thus, improve their English proficiency. Besides, some new English education policies have been developed and implemented by the Ministry of Education (MOE) in 2011. The policies include teaching and learning English in elementary schhools, English language requirement for graduation in universities and adopting English as a medium of instruction into curriculum (Chang, 2010). Consequently, due to the promoting policies, there are more and more EMI programs in Taiwan. According to the EMI programs list (Ministry of Education of Taiwan, 2014), there are a total of 181 EMI programs in 42 universities from northern to southern Taiwan as shown in appendix B. EMI has been popular in Taiwan since it is considered to effectively improve students’ English proficiency, internationalized local
education system for recruiting international students and increase the competitiveness of Taiwan education. However, there are not so many evidences that shows the policies do fulfill the purpose of EMI. Thus, the effectiveness of EMI is still waited to be explored (Chang, 2010). That is to say, questions remain on how to effectively implement EMI.
Some factors that may affect the effectiveness of EMI programs have been discussed.
First of all, students’ English ability may be insufficient to comprehend the lecture contents.
Second, teachers may not have adequate training on lecturing in English such that language proficiency and lecture skills may be low. Third, EMI programs may lack adequate administrative support. Fourth, the design also affects the effectiveness of EMI programs (Yeh C. C., 2012; Chen & Kraklow, 2015). In addition to the above factors, students’
behaviors may also affect the functioning of EMI programs. Thus, recruiting students with good behaviors such as OCB that would benefit the organizations may help an EMI program function more effectively and accomplish some purposes of EMI as expected.
Motivation
The research in motivation has a long history and can be traced back to 1950s. Maslow’s hierarchy of needs stands out and is well-known. Maslow (1954) stated that human beings have five hierarchical needs which include physiological, safety, love/belonging, esteem and self-actualization. McGregor (1960) proposed two different types of viewpoints, theory X and theory Y, of human beings. People who belong to the description of Theory X are believed to be lazy and dislike work. Thus, there must be someone or something pushing and
forcing them to work. On the contrary, people who can be categorized by theory Y are said to have sense of responsibility toward their job. They can work well without being supervised.
In addition, Herzberg (1964) indicated that the two-factor theory can explain whether an employee would have good outcomes. The two factors, motivational and hygiene, would decide whether an individual is satisfied with one’s job or the outcomes. A lack of satisfactory hygiene factors, which includes salary, supervision, relationship with colleagues or supervisors, etc., would bring about job dissatisfaction. On the other hand, motivational factors such as sense of achievement and growth would lead to more satisfied outcomes for employees. In addition to the above theories of motivation, Deci & Ryan (1985) proposed the self-determination theory to classify motivation into different types, which advanced the discussion on motivation.
Self-determination Theory (SDT)
“To be motivated means to be moved to do something,” declared by Deci and Ryan (2000b, p.54). There must be a reason behind every behavior and it is called “motivation.”
One of the most well-known theories related to motivation is self-determination theory (SDT), which is proposed by Deci and Ryan (1985). They defined motivation as three main concepts that include amotivation, extrinsic motivation and intrinsic (IM). Amotivation explains the situation when an individual does not perceive any advantages between one’s action and the results. That is, a person is neither intrinsically nor extrinsically motivated. External motivation exists when behavior is performed not because of inner interest but other forces such as instrumental reasons (Deci & Ryan, 2000b). Thus, in the situation of being
extrinsically motivated, individual may want to join an activity because of the desire for rewards, gaining approval from others or the fear to be punished. To be more detailed, extrinsic motivation can be divided into four types which are external regulation, introjected regulation, identified regulation and integrated regulation. External regulation explains an individual performing the behavior because of external requirement or wanting to get rewards in contingency. Another type of extrinsic motivation is introjected regulation which states that actions are performed in order to prevent feeling guilty or agitated or to take pride in oneself.
Another form of extrinsic motivation is identified regulation that refers to the behavior performed to achieve certain goals or regulations that one identifies to be valuable. The other kind of extrinsic motivation is integrated regulation. This type of motivation exists when identified regulation is internalized. That is, examine oneself and have new regulations be consistent with one’s value and needs (Deci & Ryan, 2000a).
In comparison with extrinsic motivation, IM is defined as a person would engage in activities out of the enjoyment or the sensation from the activity when intrinsically motivated rather than for the instrumental reason such as desire for the rewards or other external desires.
Specifically, an intrinsically motivated person would perform behavior out of their inner motives. That is to say, they would participate in activities since they not only are interested in but are also able to gain pleasure and satisfaction from the activities (Deci & Ryan, 1985).
Second Subtheory of SDT
Deci & Ryan (1985) also proposed a second subtheory within SDT, which refers to Organismic Integration Theory (OIT). In Figure 2.1, OIT taxonomy (Deci &Ryan, 2000b,
p.72) explains different forms of motivation according to the degree of autonomy or self-determination arranged from the left side of lower-level autonomy (amotivation), middle-level autonomy (extrinsic motivation) to the highest-level autonomy (intrinsic motivation). This figure shows the extent of one’s motivation coming from the inner drive.
Figure 2. 1. A taxonomy of human motivation. Adopted from “Self-Determination Theory and the Facilitation of Intrinsic Motivation, Social Development, and Well-Being,” by Deci
& Ryan, 2000b, Journal of American Psychologist, 55(1), p.72. Copyright 2006 by The American Psychologist.
On the leftmost side is amotivation, which is defined as in the situation of lacking of intention to do an action. When an individual is amotivated, one would not have any intention to do or finish a task and doesn’t perceive any possible advantages from it. Amotivation is
caused by not perceiving an activity as valuable (Ryan, 1995), not feeling competent do it (Deci, 1975; Bandura, 1986), or not believing that it will lead to the consequesce one desires (Deci & Ryan, 2000a, 2000b).
Moving to the right of amotivation would be the least autonomous type of extrinsic motivation: external regulation. This type of extrinsic motivation occurs when an individual performs behaviors out of external demand or the possibility of getting rewards. Under the situation of external regulation, a behavior would be performed and perceived as being controlled. Besides, there would be an externally perceived locus of causality (EPLOC) in the behaviors performed by an externally regulated individual (De Charms, 1968).
The second form of extrinsic motivation is introjected regulation. When introjected regulated, one would feel pressure to act. However, under this kind of situation, an individual is controlled by the sense of guilt or self-esteem. Therefore, introjected regulation is regulated more by contingent self-esteem (Deci & Ryan, 2000a). “Although the regulation is internal to the person, introjected behaviors are not experienced as fully part of the self and thus still have an EPLOC ” (Deci & Ryan, 2000a, p.62).
Compared to the previous two sorts of external motivation, a more autonomous type would be identified regulation. When identified regulated, an individual would perceive the regulation as one’s own. Hence, the behavior is performed because an individual considers the activity as a worth-doing one (Deci & Ryan, 2000a).
The last type of extrinsic motivation, which is the most autonomous one, would be integrated regulation. “Integration occurs when identified regulations have been fully
assimilated to the self.” (Deci & Ryan, 2000a, p.62). When integrated regulated, an individual would do self-evaluation and turn new regulation to correspond with one’s needs and values. Actually, integrated regulation and intrinsic motivation have some common characteristics such as both of them are autonomous. Nevertheless, this kind of motivation still belongs to extrinsic motivation since it still anticipates instrumental value with separate outcomes (Deci & Ryan, 2000a).
On the rightmost side of the figure is intrinsic motivation, which is the most autonomous and self-determined one in the SDT subtheory (Deci & Ryan, 2000b). Autonomous behavior is performed under the situation that an individual perceives one has the sense of volition and the reason for doing the action is one’s own choice (Gagneé & Deci, 2005). Therefore, intrinsic motivation would cause the behaviors performed out of one’s “own free will.”
Tripartite Intrinsic Motivation (IM)
The concept of intrinsic motivation was first recognized in the studies of animal behavior. In the studies, the author proposed that a lot of organisms would involve in behaviors out of curiosity, fun, or inquiring mind without reinforcement or desiring for getting rewards. Also, it is argued that when humans are babies, they explore the environment around them and are curious about everything new to them. In this stage, IM is undifferentiated. Nevertheless, when human grow up and gain experiences, they would start to have their own choices according to their preferences. Thus, IM then becomes differentiated and can be separated into different types of intrinsic motivation (White, 1959;
Deci, 1975). Actually, intrinsic motivation can be linked to some constructs in educational studies. For instance, intrinsic motivation to know relates to learning goals (Hayman &
Dweck, 1992), intrinsic motivation toward accomplishment has the relationship with mastery motivation (Harter, 1981 ) and there are relationships between intrinsic motivation to experience stimulation and experiencing pleasure and excited feelings (Chen & Carey, 2009).
In 1992, Vallerand and his colleagues proposed the idea of the tripartite taxonomy of IM.
They suggested that IM can be categorized into three types which are IM to know, IM toward accomplishment and IM to experience stimulation.
Intrinsic Motivation to Know (IM to Know).
IM to know refers to when a person engages in an activity resulting from the pleasure and satisfaction of learning that they would gain from the activity itself. Consequently, IM to know is defined as when engaging in an activity to learn, explore or get new knowledge, a person is able to gain pleasure and satisfaction (Vallerand et al., 1992, 1993). Bruner (1966, p.127) also depicted a concept akin to IM to know: “The will to learn is an intrinsic motive, one that finds both its source and its reward in its own exercise.” Researches on IM to know were done mainly in education field (Carbonneau, Vallerand, & Lafrenière, 2012) and it is usually connected to constructs like exploration (Berlyne, 1971 ), goal-orientated learning (Dweck, 1986), intrinsic motivation to learn (Brophy, 1986), intrinsic intellectual motivation (Lloyd & Barenblatt, 1984), and also intrinsically motivated by curiosity (Harter, 1981).
Intrinsic Motivation toward Accomplishments (IM toward Accomplishment).
IM toward accomplishment refers to a person gaining pleasure and feeling satisfied in the process of learning skills, trying to win or even surpassing oneself (Vallerand et al., 1992, 1993). This type of IM was studied on developmental psychology and mostly in education fields (Pelletier et al., 1995). IM toward accomplishment is usually linked to constructs such as effectance motivation (White, 1959), motive for mastery (Kagan, 1972), and intrinsic sense of challenge toward a task or an activity (Harter, 1981). When an individual is intrinsically motivated toward accomplishment, one would gain pleasure by trying to learn new skills, improve competence or complete a difficult task that one thinks is challenging (Carbonneau, Vallerand, & Lafrenière, 2012).
Intrinsic Motivation to Experience Stimulation (IM to Experience Stimulation).
IM to experience stimulation indicates a person would engage in an activity on account of the sensation of stimulation or aesthetic pleasure one would get in the process (Vallerand et al., 1992, 1993). Even though this kind of IM has not been studied until recently, IM to experience stimulation is stated to have connection with constructs like experiences of aesthetic stimulations (Carbonneau, Vallerand, & Lafrenière, 2012; Pelletier, Fortier, Vallerand, Tuson, Briere, & Blais, 1995), seeking of sensations, which means the willingness of risk-taking (either physical or social) for getting the experience (Carbonneau, Vallerand, &
Lafrenière, 2012; Zuckerman, 1979), sensory pleasure motive like enjoying beautiful music, paintings, views and so forth (Eisenberger et al., 2010; Carbonneau, Vallerand, & Lafrenière, 2012), peak experiences, which refers to experience something that is subjectively considered
as the high peak or the most exciting in one’s life (McInman & Grove, 1991; Pelletier, Fortier, Vallerand, Tuson, Briere, & Blais, 1995), and sentience (Carbonneau, Vallerand, & Lafrenière, 2012).
Extrinsic Motivation to Join EMI
More and more higher education institutions try to improve internationalization by adopting EMI into programs or courses (Doh, 2010). Governments also support EMI policy since they perceived that it is necessary for students to possess English proficiency to improve employability when they graduate (Costa, Coleman, & Bialystok, 2012). In addition, students from business schools believe EMI can increase their career opportunities (Byun et al., 2011).
Lueg & Lueg (2015) postulated that there might be several factors why students emroll in EMI. First, students join EMI because of job advantage which means they think joining EMI will benefit individual career. Second, students join EMI for future job need because they think English will be the common language of their future job. Third, students join EMI for improving English proficiency. Fourth, students join EMI for their own interest in foreign language. Fifth, Students join EMI because the attitudes toward English in their motherland.
Sixth, students join EMI out of their ambition. Seventh, students join EMI because of the pressure from their family. Eighth, students join EMI out of peer pressure. Last, students join EMI because of social perception. The results show that the factors of job need, job advantage, English proficiency, interest, personal ambition, pressure from family, peer pressure and social perception are related to why students join EMI.
Among the above factors, some of them including job advatage, job need, family pressure, peer pressure and social perception can be regarded as extrinsic motivation.
Moreover, some researches state that job advantage plays a crucial role on whether students choose to enroll in EMI programs (Diab, 2006; Tung, Lam, & Tsang, 1997) and students who consider possessing English proficiency as an advantage for future employment have higher possibility to join EMI programs (Lueg & Leung, 2015). Furthermore, Lueg & Leung (2015) also indicated that peer pressure would decide whether students choose EMI programs. In orther words, whether peers enroll(ed) in or hold positive attitude toward EMI programs affects students’ decision to join EMI programs. In addition, family pressure is one of the decisive factors that has impact on students’ choice of joining EMI programs. Likewise, whether students join EMI programs would also be affected by social attitude toward EMI programs. Since the mentioned factors above belong to instrumental reasons, they are categorized as extrinsic motivation to enroll in EMI programs..
Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB)
Types of Citizenship Behavior
Bateman & Organ (1983) stated that a series of behaviors have the function to lubricate the social aspect issues of the organization. However, it does not exist in the concept of task performance. This kind of behavior includes helping colleagues to solve problems on their works, accepting what is assigned without anxiety, enduring and finishing the works that are assigned provisionally without complaint, helping to keep the environment in the company in
a good situation, giving constructive suggestions instantly, promoting climate of work by reducing the conflicts in the organization, and cherishing the resource in the organization (Bateman & Dennis, 1983). All of these actions could be defined as “citizenship behaviors.”
When applied within an organization, Organ (1988, p.4) gave OCB the definition of
"individual behavior that is discretionary, not directly or explicitly recognized by the formal reward system, and that in the aggregate promotes effective functioning of the organization."
Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Paine, & Bachrach (2000) reviewed literatures and identified 30 potentially different types of citizenship behavior. Later, they categorized all of them into seven dimensions. First is the helping behavior or altruism which refers to assisting colleagues to solve problems on work or prevent problems from happening voluntarily.
Second is the sportsmanship which means when being inconvenienced by others, a person would not complain; when things do not go to the direction as expected, a person would still hold optimistic attitude; when other people refuse to take one’s advices, a person would not feel offensive; a person would not insist on one’s interest when others’ opinions are good for the team or group; and, a person would not see others’ rejection on one as other people holding against one personally. The third one is organizational loyalty which points out a person would possess high commitment toward the organization, voluntarily promote the organization and even stand out for the organization when external threats appear. Another is organizational compliance which indicates that a person would follow the rules and regulations of an organization because of one’s own will rather than being forced. That is to say, a person would complied to the rules and regulations without monitoring. Next one is individual initiative that refers to one would do extra work over one’s duty for improving