With the aforementioned literature in mind, it was determined that this study would be conducted for the purpose of constructing an L2 motivation model of learning behavior, based mainly on the framework of Ajzen’s (1991) theory of planned behavior (TPB) in social psychology, reinforced by Gollwitzer’s (1993, 1999) theory of implementation intention and Tseng and Schmitt’s (2008) model of vocabulary learning in applied linguistics. From the previous discussion of the importance of attitudes, self-confidence, social milieu, goal-oriented motivation, self-regulating capacity, and L2 achievement, reseasrchers proposed L2 motivation models and considered the interplay of some of the constructs. For example, Ajzen’s TPB model was employed to investigate undergraduates’ intention to take a second language proficiency test (Lin & Chiou, 2010), implementation intention was discussed by Dörnyei and Ottó (1998) but lacked empirical studies, and Tseng and Schmitt (2008) examined the effects of self-regulatory capacity on mastery of vocabulary learning, however, very few have placed these constructs on a motivational systems in a comprehensive scope and examined their causal relationships simultaneously (for a full review, please see discussion in chapter two). In the current study, the structure and content of Ajzen’s TPB model has been modified into the context of an L2 learning motivation model with an attempt to account for the macro-perspective of social and cultural impact as the initial motivation drivers and the micro-perspective of individual differences in L2 learning behavior. Gollwitzer’s (1993, 1999) implementation intention was employed to highlight the psychological process of formulating intention regarding L2 learning behavior and can thus increase the commitment to engaging in language learning and achieving goals. Tseng and
116
Schmitt’s (2008) model was adopted to strengthen the significant volitional factor in self-regulation and mastery of L2 learning. The present study was thus designed with nine key constructs.
The L2 learning motivation model proposed in this study is shown in Figure 3.4, in which the variables have been modified to make them relevant to second language learning and tapped into the current study in the field of applied linguistics. These variables were termed Attitudes toward L2 Learning, Social Norms, Self-Confidence, Goal Intention, Implementation Intention, Self-Regulatory Capacity, the Tactics of L2 Learning Behavior, Mastery of L2 Learning and L2 Achievement.
117
[cog= Cognitive Attitudes toward L2 Learning, aff= Affective Attitudes toward L2 Learning; inj= Injunctive Norms, des= Descriptive Norms, ling= Linguistic Norms; eff= Self-Efficacy, anx= L2 Learning Anxiety; int= Integrative Orientation, ins= Instrumental Orientation; con= Content Orientation, sit= Situational Orientation, str= Strategic Orientation; com= Commitment Control, meta= Metacognitive Control, sat= Satiation Control, emo= Emotional Control; voc= Vocabulary, grm= Grammar, read= Reading, wrt= Writing; vo= Vocabulary, cz= Cloze, gm= Grammar, dm= Idioms and Phrases, ds= Discourse, and rd= Reading] Figure 3.4 The hypothesized L2 motivational model of planned learning behavior
Attitudes Self- Regulation
L2 Learning Behavior Self- Confidence
Social Norms Implement Intention
Mastery
D5Goal Intention
L2 Achievement strconsitcomemosatmeta
surpexpappinivo wrtreadgrmvoc
dsdm
gmcz
int rd
ins
affcog linginj des anxeff
e10e11e12e16e15e14e13
e24e23e22e21
e27 e28 e29 e30
e26
e25
e17e18e19e20e8e9
e1e2 e3 e4 e5 e7e6
D2
D5 D3
D4
D1
D6
118
In the model, Attitudes toward L2 Learning, Social Norms, and Self-Confidence were hypothesized to be determinants of both Goal Intention and Implementation Intention.
In addition to the hypothesized direct effects on both types of intention, the Social Norms variable was also posited to have both direct and indirect effects on Self-Regulatory Capacity. The reasons for the causal paths lay in the hypotheses that the scale of social norms was a newly developed measure and represented a type of criteria regulating the behavior of L2 learners who were expected to reach a certain level of L2 acquisition. Therefore, it is reasonable to hypothesize that learners’
perceived expectations from their significant others will have an impact on individuals’ self-regulatory capacity. “Social Norms” was also hypothesized to affect Language Achievement indirectly via the two types of intention, Self-Regulatory Capacity, the Tactics of L2 Learning Behavior, and Mastery of L2 Learning as the mediators. In addition, the two types of intention were theorized to play determinant roles, affecting Self-regulatory Capacity and the Tactics of L2 Learning Behavior, and have indirect effects on L2 Achievement with Self-Regulatory Capacity, the Tactics of L2 Learning Behavior, and Mastery of L2 Learning as the mediating roles. Further, Self-Regulatory Capacity was hypothesized to have influence directly on the Tactics of L2 Learning Behavior and Mastery of L2 Learning, and indirectly on L2 Achievement with the Tactics of L2 Learning and Mastery of L2 Learning as the mediators. The Tactics of L2 Learning Behavior was hypothesized to have direct influence on the Mastery of L2 Learning and L2 Achievement, and indirectly on the latter as well with Mastery of L2 Learning as the mediator. Finally, Mastery was hypothesized to have direct influence on L2 Achievement.
Figure 3.3 depicted a complete specification of the structural model with nine latent variables. Each construct comprised a set of multiple items. With the constructs
119
specified, I then specified the measurement model to be tested, with specification of relationships among the constructs. The rectangles represented the measured indicator variables, and the arrows denoted the relationships between the latent variables and the respective measured indicators. As indicated, the two indicators measuring Attitudes toward L2 Learning were linked to that latent variable, as were the other constructs. The curved arrows between Attitudes toward L2 Learning, Social Norms, and Self-Confidence indicated correlation relationships between them. Finally, e1~e30 represented the errors associated with each indicator, and D1~D6, the disturbulances associated with the endogenous variables. The proposed constructs and hypothesized relationships were shown in the following figure.
Research Questions
The study sought to address the following research questions as an attempt to shed light on L2 learning motivation. The first research question aimed to interpret the overall fit of the construct of the current model, and the following three questions examined the explanatory effects of each phase contributing to the model. The last two sub-questions explored the correlations of the antecedent factors and the causal relationships of Social Norms and Self-Confidence on Self-Regulatory Capacity and/or the Tactics of L2 Learning Behavior.
1. To what extent can the structure and processes of the constructs explain the model of L2 learners’ motivation?
2. To what extent can the three antecedents—Attitudes toward L2 Learning, Social Norms, and Self-Confidence—contribute to Goal Intention and Implementation Intention?
3. To what extent can Goal Intention and Implementation Intention lead to the
120
demonstration of Self-Regulatory Capacity and the Tactics of L2 Learning Behavior?
4. To what extent can Self-Regulatory Capacity and the Tactics of L2 Learning Behavior affect Mastery of L2 Learning?
5. To what extent can the Tactics of L2 Learning Behavior and Mastery of L2 Learning contribute to L2 Achievement?
6. [sub-question 1] To what extent can Social Norms affect Self-Regulatory Capacity?
7. [sub-question 2] To what extent can Self-Confidence affect Self-Regulatory Capacity and the Tactics of L2 Learning Behavior?
Participants
The sample in the main study consisted of 265 participants. To pursue the foregoing research objective, this study involved questionnaire surveys administered to senior high school students from a school in northern Taiwan. The participants were of a convenience sample selected with the assistance of four English teachers who were teaching the participants a compulsory English course. The participant’s English level could be considered as low-intermediate to intermediate, in general, with respect to the rank status of the school in the nationwide entrance exams. In Taiwan, students need to participate in a national entrance exam to enter a senior high school or a university. From a sampling perspective, the entrance exam seemed to guarantee a certain degree of comparability of student levels and thus helped to prevent a biased sample from occurring.
Since one of the major focuses of this study was to examine the impact of social contexts and behavioral intention on learners’ L2 motivation, it was essential to have a
121
sample which had been adjusted to an environment for a period of time and was in line with the perceived academic expectations from their parent and teachers, and the sample should also possess a certain level of English proficiency. The first-year students (10th grade) were preferred to the second- and the third-year students in that the latter two underwent heavier pressure in terms of preparing for the university entrance examination in Taiwan. The first-year students were selected because they have studied English as a required course for at least seven years. These participants were assumed to be roughly equivalent in their language proficiency levels due to their participation in the entrance exam and had adjusted to their learning environment in that the study was conducted near the end in their second semester of their senior high school studies. The participants at this crucial time (having just passed the entrance exam to enter senior high school and still two years away from the university entrance exam) were in rather relaxed but self-regulated learning settings, which lent particular relevance and validity to the research concern with regard to L2 learning in this study.
Measurements
To ensure that the theoretical variables of other measurements were tapped and the face and content validity of the items were appropriate to the Chinese culture, two more experts in second language acquisition were invited to examine the scale items and both voiced approval of them. For the Social Norms dimension in the main study, only four items obtaining the highest scores in the item-total correlation from each social group (i.e. family, teachers, and peers respectively) would be selected from the tested scale. Two purposes for choosing the selected items are that the selected items may better represent the sample targeted, and the other is to avoid fatigue effects of
122
respondents while completing the questionnaire. Although the selected items are not comprehensive, they are representative of the tested scale in the earlier phase. Further, confirmatory factor analysis was conducted for all scales to confirm both the factor structure and its validity. The internal consistency reliability was assessed using Cronbach’s α, which is grounded on simple correlations of traditional statistical reliability and has been criticized as not being able to capture the essence of the psychometric properties of a scale. (Hair et al., 2006). Therefore, in addition to the Cronbach’s α computed for each scale, a Pearson correlation among the indicators was examined to determine whether the constructs can be discriminated from each other appropriately.