Second Language Learning Motivation in a European Context: The Case of Hungary (Second Language Learning and Teaching) 3030644618, 9783030644611

Citation preview

Second Language Learning and Teaching

Kata Csizér

Second Language Learning Motivation in a European Context: The Case of Hungary

Second Language Learning and Teaching Series Editor Mirosław Pawlak, Faculty of Pedagogy and Fine Arts, Adam Mickiewicz University, Kalisz, Poland

The series brings together volumes dealing with different aspects of learning and teaching second and foreign languages. The titles included are both monographs and edited collections focusing on a variety of topics ranging from the processes underlying second language acquisition, through various aspects of language learning in instructed and non-instructed settings, to different facets of the teaching process, including syllabus choice, materials design, classroom practices and evaluation. The publications reflect state-of-the-art developments in those areas, they adopt a wide range of theoretical perspectives and follow diverse research paradigms. The intended audience are all those who are interested in naturalistic and classroom second language acquisition, including researchers, methodologists, curriculum and materials designers, teachers and undergraduate and graduate students undertaking empirical investigations of how second languages are learnt and taught.

More information about this series at http://www.springer.com/series/10129

Kata Csizér

Second Language Learning Motivation in a European Context: The Case of Hungary

Kata Csizér School of English and American Studies Department of English Applied Linguistics Eötvös Loránd University Budapest, Hungary

ISSN 2193-7648 ISSN 2193-7656 (electronic) Second Language Learning and Teaching ISBN 978-3-030-64461-1 ISBN 978-3-030-64462-8 (eBook) https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-64462-8 © Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020 This work is subject to copyright. All rights are reserved by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed. The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. This Springer imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Switzerland AG The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland

Context is all. —Margaret Atwood The lesson-book we cannot graduate from is human experience. —Edith Hamilton

Preface

My story with applied linguistics started in the mid-90s at a university campus in Budapest. At the time, I was an English major and I am not saying I was struggling with my studies, but I was far from being a top student. I never learnt English in secondary school; my knowledge came from a brief immersion opportunity and a lot of self-study: I was clearly behind my peers. In addition, although I was an avid reader, analyzing literary texts, which was a large part of the curriculum, was not my strong suit either. As for linguistics, it was just too difficult for me. So, when a subject called applied linguistics popped up in my study unit list in the fourth year, I thought: ‘Oh no, what’s next?’ Luckily, it was a series of non-compulsory lectures which did not need my immediate attention. I had waited for a couple of weeks before finally making my mind up to attend because my cousin said we should. A blond-haired and very enthusiastic young man was talking about something along the lines of applied linguistics. You might be able to guess where I am going with this story: The name of the young man, on the verge of international fame, was Zoltán Dörnyei. From then on, it did not take long to verbalize my thoughts to my cousin: ‘Wow, this is what I want to do!’ In response, she rolled her eyes: ‘This? Really?’ ‘Yes,’ I replied. ‘Applied linguistics will be my field of study.’ To further this aim, the following semester, I took one of Zoltán’s seminars. I cannot say that I shone out in the group but, with my background in sociology, I did well in that seminar, except for the end-of-term submission. At the end of the semester, we had to submit a term paper to obtain a grade, which I did diligently. Zoltán’s feedback was not long: He pointed out that I was not only off-topic but also off-task. I basically misunderstood everything. However, the last sentence of his (very motivational!) feedback said: “I would really like to work with you on a project in the future.” Well, I was extremely lucky because we did. Both my M.A. thesis research (published in Dörnyei & Csizér, 1998) as well as my Ph.D. studies (published in Dörnyei, Csizér & Németh, 2006) were supervised by Zoltán. The published version of my M.A. study remains my most highly cited work. Indeed, the irony is not lost on me. Ever since finishing my studies, I have been researching motivation and related fields in various Hungarian contexts. Despite the fact that a high number of studies conducted in Hungary have been published in international journals, there are still vii

viii

Preface

many more available only in Hungarian, therefore, I think it is high time to provide a summary of the past decades pertaining to second/foreign language (L2) motivation studies describing students as well as teachers. Hence, the aim of this volume is to give a snapshot of the last 30 years of L2 motivation research in Hungary, concentrating on some of the findings that were previously only published in Hungarian and, at the same time, adding new colors to the rich tapestry of international L2 motivation research. One might wonder why it is important to focus on this particular country. As we explained in Dörnyei, Csizér and Németh (2006), Hungary is the perfect ‘laboratory’ to research foreign language teaching and learning for several reasons. During the twentieth century, Hungary turned from a multilingual country into a monolingual one, from an open society to a closed one and then an open one again. Our first language, Hungarian, does not have any immediate and readily available kins in language families. As a result, the most characteristic foreign language learning context for us is the classroom with a heavy emphasis on various high-stake exams throughout compulsory education. In addition, as I will explain in detail below, Hungarians lag behind in foreign language proficiency in the European Union. For approximately half of the past 70 years, Russian was a compulsory foreign language at all levels in the Hungarian educational system. The years of 1989/1990 brought not only a change of regime but also a liberalization of foreign language teaching, which meant that a large number of students started to learn English as well as other foreign languages. Consequently, it may not be a coincidence that L2 motivation research had started flourishing in Hungary, starting with the pioneering and highly influential work of Zoltán Dörnyei, Edit Kontra and Judit Kormos. Therefore, summarizing research results from the past 30 years might help academics in other contexts as well to set new directions for research. This volume has five main parts. First, some relevant contextual and definitional information are discussed. I will try to provide a series of snapshots of the Hungarian foreign language learning context, including the definition of classroom context, to provide a background to L2 motivation research. After that, I will define L2 motivation pertaining to the classroom context from both an emic and etic perspective before briefly summarizing the important theoretical considerations by critically evaluating some of the important motivational theories to establish research gaps for future reference. Next, student-related studies will be summarized thematically, followed by a report on my recent mixed-methods study on English teacher motivation. Finally, I will set out some new research directions for L2 motivation research in Hungary and beyond. In the appendices, I have added the English translations of some instruments used in Hungary in the past, as well as some further contextually interesting information. Budapest, Hungary

Kata Csizér

Acknowledgements

First of all, I would like to thank Zoltán Dörnyei for helping me throughout the years. I am sure that when he accepted me as a Ph.D. student in 1998, he did not realize that this would be a life-long responsibility. Thank you, Zoltán, for answering my emails ever since. Second, I must thank Mirosław Pawlak for giving me the opportunity to write this book. Next, I would like to thank my co-researchers: I could not have done my job effectively without the help of my colleagues, most notably, Edit Kontra, Judit Kormos, Katalin Piniel, Éva Illés and Ágnes Albert. Special thanks are due to Marianne Nikolov and Monika Ford for helping me to finalize my manuscript. In addition, I would like to thank the teachers and students who participated in my studies in the past twenty years. I don’t think they know how much their time and effort are appreciated. Finally, thanks are also due to my family for giving me space and time to pursue my professional interests. Large parts of this book were written during the chaotic and stressful times of the corona quarantine in the spring of 2020 that made me realize what the truly important things in life were: My life without my family would amount to nothing.

ix

Contents

1 The Hungarian Context . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

1

2 A Summary of Theoretical Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.1 Defining L2 Motivation: Researchers’ and Teachers’ Perspectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.2 Classic Theories of L2 Motivation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.3 The Process Perspective in L2 Motivation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.4 Self-Related Concepts in L2 Motivation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.4.1 The Role of Self-Confidence and Self-Efficacy in L2 Motivation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.4.2 L2 Motivational Self System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.5 Dynamic Perspective in L2 Motivation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.6 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

7

3 Research Pertaining to Student Motivation in Hungary . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.1 Language Choice in the Hungarian Education System . . . . . . . . . . . 3.2 Motivation and Related Individual Difference Variables . . . . . . . . . . 3.2.1 The Canadian Influences . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.2.2 Motivation and Autonomy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.2.3 Motivation and Emotions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.2.4 Motivation and Cognitive Factors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.2.5 Group-Related Individual Difference Variables and Motivation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.3 The Role of Milieu . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.3.1 Background to the Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.3.2 Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.3.3 Main Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.3.4 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.4 Contact Experiences and Motivation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.4.1 Intercultural Contact . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.4.2 The Impact of Intercultural Contact on L2 Motivation . . . . . 3.4.3 A New Direction in Contact and L2 Motivation Research: Study Abroad Investigations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

7 11 19 20 20 22 24 25 27 27 30 30 31 32 33 34 37 37 38 39 41 41 41 44 44 xi

xii

Contents

3.5 Demotivation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.6 Special Educational Needs Learners . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.6.1 Dyslexic Language Learners . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.6.2 Deaf Language Learners . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.7 Longitudinal Studies of L2 Motivation in Hungary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.8 Age-Related Differences . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.9 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

45 48 48 49 52 53 55

4 Teacher Motivation in Hungary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.1 Teacher Motivation: Definitions, Theoretical and Conceptual Frameworks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.2 Empirical Studies on L2 Teachers’ Motivation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.3 The Design of a Mixed-Methods Study Investigating English Teachers’ Motivation in Hungary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.4 Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.4.1 Main Research Questions in the Mixed-Methods Study . . . . 4.4.2 Participants in the Qualitative Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.4.3 The Interview Guide . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.4.4 Data Collection and Data Analysis of the Qualitative Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.4.5 Participants in the Quantitative Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.4.6 The Questionnaire . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.4.7 Data Collection and Data Analysis of the Questionnaire Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.5 The Main Results of the Interview Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.5.1 Language Learning Experience and Its Impact on Teacher Motivation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.5.2 Teachers’ Views on Motivation: Choice Motivation and the Teacher Self . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.5.3 Motivation and Attribution: Explaining Successes and Failures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.5.4 Professional Goals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.5.5 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.6 The Main Results of the Questionnaire Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.6.1 Motivational Scales . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.6.2 Demotivation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.6.3 The Relationships Among the Scales . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.6.4 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

57 58 60 66 67 67 67 68 69 69 70 72 72 72 78 83 87 89 90 90 91 93 97

5 Conclusion and Further Research Directions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99 5.1 Toward a Theoretical Model of Language Teacher Motivation . . . . . 99 5.1.1 The Need for Further Interactional Studies on Motivation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102 5.2 The Need for Novelty in Research Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107 5.3 Final Words . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108

Contents

xiii

Appendix A: English Language Journals/Volumes Published in Hungary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109 Appendix B: Questionnaire Items Used in Jánosházi and Csizér (2011) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113 Appendix C: Questionnaire Used in Csizér and Kormos (2008a, 2008b, 2009a) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117 Appendix D: The English Version of the Teacher Interview Guide in Csizér (2020) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127 Appendix E: The English Version of the Teacher Questionnaire in Csizér (2020) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131 Appendix F: Factor Analysis of the Demotivational Items (Csizér 2020) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 137 Appendix G: Student Questionnaire in Illés and Csizér (2010) . . . . . . . . . 139 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145

Chapter 1

The Hungarian Context

Social studies including second/foreign language (L2) research cannot exists in a vacuum, therefore, it is important to provide some background information on Hungary and its education system in order to understand what motivated the empirical studies presented in Chapters 3 and 4. More than a decade ago, in the first monograph of L2 motivational processes in Hungary, we provided a summary of the Hungarian context in Dörnyei, Csizér, and Németh’s (2006) book, which detailed how this Central-European country became monolingual after WWI, and how the Soviet occupation between 1949 and 1989 not only made learning Russian compulsory in primary, secondary and tertiary education, but also largely limited international travel up to 1989, which made foreign language knowledge a fairly rare commodity. Although the teaching of languages besides Russian, mainly English and German, had become increasingly popular from the 1970s, taking the place of Russian after the change of regime in 1989/1990, the language knowledge of Hungarians was still rather poor at the time of joining the European Union in 2004 with only about 12% of the population claiming to have been able to speak a foreign language (Fodor & Peluau, 2003). European statistics in the past decade and a half have repeatedly indicated that Hungarians, despite a growing number able to speak languages other than Hungarian, still lagged behind other European nations. According to the statistics published in 2007, 74.8% of Hungarians did not speak any foreign languages. This figure decreased over a decade to 57.6% in 2016, but it still meant that more than half of the population claimed to be able to converse only in Hungarian; a far cry from other European countries (e.g., Luxembourg, the Netherlands and Slovenia) on the top of the list (Eurobarometer, 2012; European Statistics, 2016). This gloomy picture should be set against the background of the reality that Hungary is a monolingual country with over 99% of the population having Hungarian as a first language (Hungarian Central Statistical Office, 2013) and, therefore, school is the context of foreign language learning for most Hungarians. Therefore, when considering the results of theoretical and empirical research, a number of facts should be taken into account that are inherent to formal education and to the classroom setting © Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020 K. Csizér, Second Language Learning Motivation in a European Context: The Case of Hungary, Second Language Learning and Teaching, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-64462-8_1

1

2

1 The Hungarian Context

in Hungary (Öveges & Csizér, 2018). (1) Students are taught by state-educated and qualified teachers who have to follow curricula based on the Hungarian National Core Curriculum and the frame curricula and local syllabi, and who mainly use course books in their teaching practice. (2) Teaching and learning involve teacherstudent and student-student interaction within the classroom setting and different types of L2 programs (e.g., intensive language learning program) are established in different types of schools. (3) The number of lessons is specified for each Year and teaching is organized in groups (i.e., whole classes are split into smaller groups in order to enhance opportunities for interaction) with a varying number of students. (4) Attendance is compulsory and regular assessment is required. Assessment is based on achievement targets specified by the Common European Framework (Council of Europe, 2001) and vary according to L2 programs and types of school. (5) Teaching is supported by centrally organized schemes (see below for more details). Accordingly, I will introduce the Hungarian context by summarizing information pertaining to teacher education, central curricula, course books, assessment, grouprelated information and governmental initiatives in order to provide a background to studies presented in Chapter 3 and 4. (For more information on research forums in Hungary, see Appendix A.) 1. Teacher education. The system of teacher education, including that of foreign language teachers, has changed several times in Hungary over the past 30 years. The Bologna system (3 years BA in language + 2 years MA in teacher training) was implemented between 2005 and 2017. The current post-Bologna system was introduced in 2013, and, in many ways, resembles the pre-Bologna teacher education system. Presently, teacher education is undivided into a maximum of 6-year long post-secondary education with a short and a long teaching practice. Each pre-service teacher is required to choose two school subjects (e.g., English and German, or English and Mathematics), but their studies differ in length depending whether they are in pre-service teacher education for primary (10 semesters) or secondary education (12 semesters). The long practicum takes a whole school year at the end of the pre-service teachers’ formal education in Year 5 or 6. There are some empirical results concerning the motivation of English language pre-service teachers (see Chapter 4.2 for details). Interestingly, despite their long education, many of them do not even start their teaching career or they leave this career very early. 2. In terms of the teaching curricula in Hungary, a five tier-system is used. The top level is represented by the National Core Curriculum (2012, currently a 150+ page document, with the updated version being introduced in the 2020/2021 school year) defining that the teaching of the first foreign language is officially introduced in Year 4 and continues to be compulsory until Year 12. A second foreign language is introduced in Year 7, but it only becomes compulsorily in secondary grammar schools from Year 9 to Year 12 and not in primary schools or secondary vocational schools. Primary schools can offer four foreign languages: English, German, French and Chinese, the latter catering for the primary education of the Chinese speaking population in Hungary. In secondary education, any foreign language

1 The Hungarian Context

3

can be offered by schools, provided the school has a qualified teacher and students who are interested. Despite such a liberal setting, multiple studies confirm that the most popular choice is English as a foreign language followed by German as a rather distant second choice (Dörnyei, Csizér, & Németh, 2016; Öveges & Csizér, 2018). The number of weekly lessons to be had is also defined in the National Core Curriculum: The number of lessons per week ranges from 3 to 6 per week in various Years in non-dual language schools. A maximum 6 lessons per week are provided for students in secondary grammar schools learning two foreign languages. A higher number of lessons are offered in dual language schools in which partial immersion is employed with students learning various subjects in the target language. The second level curriculum is called the frame curricula that provide detailed information on the teaching content for the various types of schools and programs run in these schools. Currently, 60 + frame curricula exist in Hungary. Further levels of planning are related to the local syllabi developed by each school for detailing teaching-related information mainly for parents. Finally, teachers have to work out a syllabus based on the above curricula and the local syllabus, including lesson plans for each of their groups. 3. The use of course books is mandatory and is centrally regulated by the Education Authority Office (Currently, there is no Ministry of Education in the country, the main bodies responsible for decision making are the Education Authority Office, the State Secretariat for Public Education within the Ministry of Human Capacities; while higher education belongs to the Ministry for Innovation and Technology). Teachers can select from an annually updated and accredited list of course books. Öveges (2018) analyzed the variety of different course books used in Hungarian schools and concluded that the level of the course books did not always match the proficiency level of the students, which might be demotivating for both teachers and students. Although we know that dispositions toward various aspects of learning shape motivation (see Chapter 2), there is no research available on students’ and teachers’ dispositions toward course books, nor on their dispositions toward additional materials used in the classroom. 4. Formative and summative assessment. Students are assessed at various points in time by different stakeholders. During the school year, from September to mid-June, students receive their grade report twice: at the end of the first term in January and at the end of the school year in June. Grades are based on formative assessment throughout the school year. Based on a recent study (Illés & Csizér, 2018), we can conclude that students are most often assessed by in-class vocabulary tests. The importance of grades given varies during the 12-year compulsory education. They are taken into account when students transition from primary to secondary education (i.e., after either Year 4, 6 or 8). The end-of year grades given for foreign languages in Years 11 and 12 might be considered at the university entrance exam after Year 12. (Students can choose whether they would like their end-of-year grades or their school leaving exam grades to be considered in order to be admitted to university.) Apart from grading students, another way of assessing them is by proficiency tests, administered centrally during compulsory education. In Year 6 and 8 students are centrally tested for their communicative

4

1 The Hungarian Context

competence in foreign language in three skills (no speaking test is used). The aim of these tests is to establish whether students reached the centrally required output levels by the National Core Curriculum. Secondary school education finishes with the school leaving exam consisting of complex exams in five subjects including a foreign language. The language exam can be taken at two levels: intermediate (B1 in the Common European Framework [Council of Europe, 2001]) or advanced (B2) levels. For the purpose of gaining university entry, the school leaving exams serve as entrance exams with each higher education institution setting their own requirements for the advance level exams (maximum 2) within the centrally set scoring system. Within this system, extra points are awarded to those students who have certificates of B2 or C1 language proficiency exams, and, at the same time, the B2 exam is also an output requirement, i.e., a university degree cannot be awarded without a B2-level language exam. This means that students who would like to pursue their studies beyond compulsory education may be very motivated to take proficiency exams but once they pass the exam, their motivation to maintain language proficiency may subside. 5. Group-related information: Class and group sizes are prescribed by the Law on the National Public Education. A typical foreign language group comprises 11– 15 students, and their composition is usually decided upon by the local (i.e., school-level) syllabi. Streaming is often based on language levels, even in early years in education when no meaningful differences exist among students (Öveges & Csizér, 2018). It is known from the study investigating the opinions of foreign language teachers that they very often think that group sizes are too large and differentiation is difficult within non-homogenous groups (Illés & Csizér, 2018). In fact, group-related characteristics, such as size and heterogeneous levels, are considered by teachers as one of the major threats to the quality of teaching in Hungary (Illés & Csizér, 2018). In terms of group-leaders (i.e., teachers) and their role in group dynamics, teacher turnover is relatively high in Hungary. As part of a nationwide representative study, Albert and her colleagues found that by the time students reach Year 7, many of them have had at least three language teachers, i.e., one teacher in every new school year (Albert, Tankó, & Piniel, 2018a). The results for Year 11 students were found to be similar (Albert, Tankó, & Piniel, 2018b). This fact might influence group dynamical processes in the classroom. 6. Governmental programs/efforts. The past 30 years have seen a few centrally initiated schemes and programs to improve foreign language learning in Hungary. One of the earliest such efforts was a reportedly successful initiative: The so called year of intensive language learning program (YILL), which is an extra year made available for the study of foreign languages with only very few classes in other subjects. This program is offered by a large number of secondary schools and it is to be completed before the start of the regular secondary education (Nikolov, Ottó, & Öveges, 2009). Dual language schools offering primary and/or secondary education are another success story. These school may or may not have an intensive year but teach a selected number of school subjects in the target language (Vámos, 2008). The most recent new initiative is study abroad

1 The Hungarian Context

5

schemes. This centrally initiated plan aims to help foreign language learning in compulsory education, as all students in Year 9 and Year 11 are eligible for a free two-week study abroad trip, mainly to countries where the target language is used as an official language. Unfortunately, the Covid-19 situation in the spring of 2020 thwarted the first cohort of students participating in the initiative and, hence, there is no experience or data available yet on the effectiveness of the study abroad scheme. Finally, several government-initiated financial support schemes have been introduced such as making course books available for students at no charge. Both the theoretical and empirical analyses presented in this book need to be set against the background presented above. I must acknowledge the fact that there are very few large-scale nationwide studies that can inform researchers and stakeholders about the state of education in Hungary. Sadly, it seems that there are not enough education researchers in the country (Csapó, Bodorkós, & Bús, 2015).

Chapter 2

A Summary of Theoretical Considerations

L2 motivation theories have mostly been inspired by research in psychology which is no coincidence. As Dörnyei (2019a, p. 31) pointed out “linguistics and psychology have traditionally taken different routes to exploring language, yet applied linguistics and psychology did converge in one specific area – which they also had in common with education – namely, in their interest in the personality/identity of the language learner.” In the following subchapters, I will first discuss definitions pertaining to L2 motivation and outline the relevance of some of the most widely cited theories of L2 motivation. As for the conceptual viewpoint, a classroom learning context is considered that takes into account both student and teacher perspectives, their interaction, as well as the impact of classroom learning on learning outside the classroom. Both classic L2 motivation theories developed in 1990s and earlier are considered, together with some new developments.

2.1 Defining L2 Motivation: Researchers’ and Teachers’ Perspectives The first step of any scientific inquiry is to define the topic. In this chapter, I aim to accomplish two things. First, I will summarize the most important definitions provided by L2 motivation scholars (i.e., the etic perspective). Next, I will provide an emic perspective and analyze the definitions that foreign language teachers in Hungary proposed during a recent interview study. After comparing the two perspectives, I will present a classroom-sensitive definition of L2 motivation before detailing L2 motivation theories in the next chapter. Motivation is a highly complex notion, widely used not only in everyday life but in many branches of science (e.g., motivational psychology, educational studies, social psychology, applied linguistics and language pedagogy). It intends to explain © Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020 K. Csizér, Second Language Learning Motivation in a European Context: The Case of Hungary, Second Language Learning and Teaching, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-64462-8_2

7

8

2 A Summary of Theoretical Considerations

nothing less than the reason for human behavior. Because of this ambitious aim, there is no general consensus on the definition of motivation, although most researchers dealing with motivation would agree that it “concerns the direction and magnitude of human behavior, that is: the choice of a particular action, the persistence with it, the effort expended on it” (Dörnyei, 2001a, p. 8). As for L2 motivation, Dörnyei and Ushioda (2011) explain why it is difficult to come to an agreement with regards to providing a clear definition of L2 motivation. They present six challenges in connection with research in the field: (1) the challenge of consciousness versus unconsciousness; (2) cognition versus affect; (3) reduction versus comprehensiveness; (4) parallel multiplicity (i.e., multiple parallel influences on human behavior); (5) context; and (6) time. (For the latest summary of challenges in L2 motivation research, see Dörnyei, 2020). No research project can be complex enough to address all these challenges simultaneously, and, therefore, the definition of L2 motivation appropriate for a particular research project may have varying relevance to other projects. Therefore, I will first provide an overview of the existing definitions and consider their perspectives of classroom teaching as defined in Chapter 1. Robert Gardner, one of the most influential figures in L2 motivation research, has worked with several L2 motivation definitions in the last 50 years. His definitions depended on what aspects of L2-related behavior he was exploring but Gardner’s most often cited definition states that L2 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 this activity” (Gardner, 1985, p. 10). In his view, L2 motivation consists of three components (a) effort expended to achieve a goal, (b) a desire to learn the language, and (c) satisfaction with the task of learning the language. An alternative definition is presented with regard to a later model of L2 motivation, developed by Tremblay and Gardner (1995). In this study, the emphasis was shifted to psychological processes, and L2 motivation was defined as a complex of motivational behavior-related variables influenced by several psychological phenomena (e.g., goal salience, valence, self-efficacy) as well as adaptive attributions. In their conceptualization, learners’ attitudes toward the language and its use do not constitute L2 motivation but are measured as antecedent variables to motivation and are outside its conceptual domain. In another study, similar to Brophy’s (1987), Gardner and his colleagues have distinguished between trait and state motivation; the former being more enduring, while the latter is seen as activity-related or situation specific (Tremblay, Goldberg, & Gardner, 1995). Despite the various research directions investigated by Gardner, his work is usually associated with the social psychological paradigm of the L2 motivation field. In the first half of the 1990s, several researchers challenged this approach. At a definitional level, Crookes and Schmidt (1991), the forerunners of the ‘educational shift’ in the L2 motivation field, expanded the definition of L2 motivation by drawing on Keller’s (1983) work and suggested that both internal and external factors should be considered. The internal attitudinal features included interest, relevance, expectancy of success and failure, and outcomes. The external behavioral characteristics described a learner who “1., decides to choose, pay attention to, and engage in L2 learning; 2.,

2.1 Defining L2 Motivation: Researchers’ and Teachers’ Perspectives

9

persists in it over an extended period of time and returns to it after interruption; 3., maintains a high level of activity” (p. 14). By the end of the 1990s another aspect of motivation, namely, its dynamic status (i.e., how it might change or evolve over time), had become the center of attention for many researchers. Williams and Burden (1997) provided a definition which is largely cognitive but is placed within a social constructivist framework. Motivation, as they see it, is “a state of cognitive and emotional arousal, which leads to a conscious decision to act and which gives rise to a period of sustained intellectual and/or physical effort in order to attain a previously set goal (or goals)” (p. 120). Dörnyei (1998a) has tried to strike a balance between the static and dynamic aspects of L2 motivation and defined the notion as a “process whereby a certain amount of instigation force arises, initiates action, and persists as long as no other force comes into play to weaken it and thereby terminate action, or until the planned outcome has been reached” (p. 118). In a similar vein, Dörnyei and Ottó’s (1998) definition of motivation is as follows: “In a general sense, motivation can be defined as the dynamically changing cumulative arousal in a person that initiated, directs, co-ordinates, amplifies, terminates, and evaluates the cognitive and motor processes whereby initial wishes and desires are selected, prioritized, operationalized and (successfully or unsuccessfully) acted out” (p. 65). The most common characteristics of these definitions are that all of them focus on the person, in our case, the language learner. Interactional processes are entirely missing from these definitions despite the fact that classroom learning cannot be fathomed without teacher-student and student-student interactions. Similarly, despite the fact that some of the definitions include a certain level of complexity indicating that motivation is influenced by various processes (e.g., Crookes & Schmidt, 1991; Tremblay & Gardner, 1995), possible classroom-related issues are not included explicitly in any of the definitions. Other defining characteristics of classroom learning include the changing nature of motivation: Its fluctuation is more of a norm than an exception in classroom learning. And indeed, several definitions conceptualized motivation as a process (Williams & Burden, 1997; Dörnyei, 1998a) with Dörnyei and Ottó (1998) adding the dynamical aspect to it, i.e., it is “the dynamically changing cumulative arousal” (p. 65). Some further issues to consider include the state and trait perspectives at a definitional level. Even though Brophy (1987) called our attention to these important distinctions, the definitions provided here fail to mention the state and trait perspectives. It should be noted that it is increasingly accepted that many individual difference (ID) variables, including L2 motivation, have both trait (i.e., relative stable characteristics) and state (situation-specific) components (for a recent review, see Csizér & Albert, in press). One of the possible reasons for the lack of classroom-sensitive definitions might lie in the practical fact that definitions are needed to guide research projects and empirical work. As no research study can fully capture the complexity of the investigated phenomenon, in our case, the classroom setting, the process of simplification becomes inevitable, as in the case of the above outlined definitions. If the simplification is indeed for the sake of research practice, non-researcher stakeholders, such as teachers, might have different definitions of L2 motivation (Illés, 2012). Thus,

10

2 A Summary of Theoretical Considerations

it becomes important to compare the definitions provided by teachers to the ones collected above. In order to compare researchers’ and teachers’ definition of L2 motivation, I will present the analysis of some recent qualitative data (Csizér, 2020). In this interview study, I asked ten English teachers from various teaching contexts to define L2 motivation. When I asked this definitional question, the teacher interviewees recognized instantly that this was an important part of research in applied linguistics and language pedagogy. Some of them also knew that I was a L2 motivation researcher which created some initial inhibitions, but I made it clear that I was interested in their own views of motivation, which reassured them. However, some still framed their opinions, as Balázs put it: “the motivation that lives within me” or Barbara: “I know that there is a scientific definition.” Table 2.1 presents excerpts from the interviews regarding participants’ definitions, including the participants’ pseudo names in the first column. (For details on the methods of this study including its participants, see Chapter 4.) The similarities between the researchers’ and teachers’ definitions include the perspective of the students and the fact that motivation is an inner drive: Without this inner drive learning fails to happen even with ongoing teaching. Another point Table 2.1 Defining L2 motivation: the teachers’ perspectives András

They [i.e. students] want to get better whilst enjoying language learning.

Balázs

Feeling of competence, autonomy, safety.

Anna

When I do a task with pleasure and feel an inner drive to accomplish it.

Barbara You have a vision that you want to reach, which you are working toward and willing to do things. I think this willing-to-do-things part is what you cannot spare. Motivation is sometimes painful because you have to do things for it. Cili

They [the student] want to learn.

Dalma

Motivation is everything that sparks enthusiasm. I feel that this is partly an inner characteristic. I think it belongs to positive and negative attitudes.

Emese

An inner drive […] Whether I have a conscious disposition toward the other person or not. I have a vision that I offer with my own efforts to the other person, by which something moves in this person making them move toward and get into a better state.

Fanni

How much I want to go in and see the group, how much I believe that good things will happen there, to what extent I think this will have a real impact on us and also how much I enjoy it [the process].

Gréta

Motivation should mainly be an inner drive and if this inner drive is there, I can contribute to it by making them even more motivated using experiences rather than by force. I should strengthen this inner drive.

Hajni

To make them more open or open them up. […] To give them impetus and to arouse their thirst for knowledge. It is similar to putting the key into the ignition to start the car. I need to know where the key is, I need to know what to do with the key. And to know what pedals to push to start the engine. When the engine starts, I still need to do a few things for the car to start and obviously I drive the car. But the engine is working and we are going forward.

Note My own translations

2.1 Defining L2 Motivation: Researchers’ and Teachers’ Perspectives

11

worth mentioning is that some of the teachers talked about enjoyment as part of their definition echoing Gardner’s (1985) notion of satisfaction, which has not yet been included in other definitions. This, as Fanni pointed out, should be related to the teachers as well: “how much I enjoy it.” An interesting but differing approach to motivation emerges from the definitions by Emese, Fanni, Gréta and Hajni: the classroom-sensitive, interactional aspect to defining motivation. A person does not exist in a vacuum but in a context (cf. Ushioda’s person-in-context approach to motivation, see in Dörnyei & Ushioda, 2011) and motivation is co-constructed by teachers and students within the classroom as per these definitions. Based on Hajni’s driving related analogy, motivation can be seen not only as a process as echoed by Dörnyei’s definitions (Dörnyei, 1998a; Dörnyei & Ottó, 1998) but a process led by the teacher. Based on the perspectives of the researchers as well as those of the teachers pertaining to the definition of motivation, I would like to propose a classroomsensitive definition that describes L2 motivation as an interactional process which subsumes effort and persistence to learn a foreign language and which is coconstructed by teachers and students alike in the classroom with an effect on activities and learning taking place both within and outside the classroom. As for the components of this definition, effort and persistence come from the core definition of motivation (Dörnyei, 2001a), motivation as an interactional process is supported by the above presented teacher-related data as well as recent studies on the relational dimension of L2 motivation (e.g., Henry, Sundqvist, & Thorsen, 2019). In terms of activities, the relationship between in class and out of class activities studies dealing with explicit, implicit and incidental learning should be taken into account (Dörnyei, 2009a). In the following chapter I will summarize the most widely used frameworks of L2 motivation. In overviewing these theoretical considerations, I would like to see to what extent and in what ways theories considered classroom-level issues concerning L2 motivation before detailing empirical studies in Hungary in Chapter 3. The use of the definition presented above is considered to be important when I propose further studies in L2 motivation in Hungary and beyond (see Chapter 5 for details).

2.2 Classic Theories of L2 Motivation It is an indisputable fact the field of L2 motivation was established by Wallace Lambert and Robert Gardner (Gardner & Lambert, 1959, 1972) by introducing the notion of integrative motivation in an attempt to explain variation in L2 motivation. Integrative motivation has become a pivotal part of Gardner’s motivation theory, but it has also been used in many other contexts. As Gardner (2001) points out, “it has slightly different meanings to many different individuals” (p. 1). Dörnyei (2003) adds that “the notion has remained an enigma: It has no obvious parallels in any areas of mainstream motivational psychology and its exact nature is difficult to define” (p. 5). Despite this, a common basis of the concept implies varied psychological

12

2 A Summary of Theoretical Considerations

and emotional identification either with the language community (Gardner, 2001), or if no salient L2 community is present in the immediate learning environment, identification with values associated with the L2 community and/or the language or identification with the language itself (Dörnyei, 1990). In Gardner’s theory one has to differentiate between integrative orientation, integrativeness and the integrative motive (see Fig. 2.1). Orientations, in Gardner’s terminology, are the reasons behind learning an L2, more precisely they “represent ultimate goals for achieving the more immediate goal of learning the second language” (Gardner, 1985, p. 11). Gardner’s integrative orientation not only “stresses an emotional involvement with the other community” but also “reflects a positive non-ethnocentric approach to the other community” (pp. 133–134). Gardner (1985, 2001) defines integrativeness as a latent construct made up of the following variables: interest in foreign languages, integrative orientation and attitudes toward Canadian/European French. As a result of this operationalization, this concept reflects a genuine interest in learning the second language in order to come closer to the other language community. At one level, this implies an openness to, and respect for other cultural groups and ways of life. In the extreme, this might involve complete identification with the community (and possibly even withdrawal from one’s original group), but more commonly it might well involve integration within both communities. (Gardner, 2001, p. 5)

The integrative motive is composed of attitudinal, goal-directed, and motivational variables. It subsumes integrativeness (as defined above), attitudes toward the learning situation (evaluation of the L2 teacher and course) and ‘motivation.’ The Interest in Foreign Languages

Integrative Orientation

Attitudes toward L2 community

Desire to Learn the L2

INTEGRATIVENESS

MOTIVATION

Motivation Intensity (Effort)

ATTITUDES TOWARDS THE LEARNING SITUATION Attitudes toward Learning the L2

Evaluation of the L2 Teacher

Evaluation of the L2 course

Fig. 2.1 A schematic representation of Gardner’s integrative motive (based on Gardner, 1985, pp. 82–83)

2.2 Classic Theories of L2 Motivation

13

latter concept is defined as a latent concept comprising (a) the desire to learn the L2, (b) motivation intensity (or effort), and (c) attitudes toward learning the L2. Following Gardner’s pathbreaking work on motivation in the Canadian context, Crookes and Schmidt’s (1991) article titled Motivation: reopening the Research Agenda became one of the most influential articles of the early 1990s in L2 motivation research. They evaluated both L2 and non-L2 motivation research to build a theoretical model. A research agenda was also outlined to inspire subsequent research work. The authors viewed Gardner’s works as having been “so dominant that alternative concepts have not been seriously considered” (p. 501), which was hardly Gardner’s and his colleagues’ fault. However, the lack of competing frameworks, in Crookes and Schmidt’s view, “has made it difficult (1) to see the connection between motivation as defined in previous SL [second language] studies and motivation as discussed in other fields, (2) to make direct links from motivation to psychological mechanisms of SL learning and (3) to see clear implications for language pedagogy from such previous SL research” (p. 502). In the light of these claims, it is no wonder that Keller’s (1983) education-oriented theory served as an example. On the one hand, Keller’s theory was firmly embedded in the psychological tradition of motivation research (expectancy-value theory, field theory and social-learning theory), while on the other hand, it provided clear implications for teachers in terms of how to increase students’ motivation. As a consequence, Crookes and Schmidt’s education-friendly theory of L2 motivation (Table 2.2) is organized into four distinct levels: the micro level (i.e., psychological processes), the classroom level, the syllabus/curriculum level and, finally, the extracurricular level (i.e., what happens outside the classrooms). According to Crookes and Schmidt (1991), their theory of motivation is as applicable to informal, naturalistic learning as to classroom learning, and no different processes of learning are involved. In informal learning, as in formal classroom learning, the basic motivational issues are the same: does the learner take advantage of opportunities for learning, persist at what is basically a difficult enterprise and what factors facilitate such persistence (p. 494). One of the main issues with the list Crookes and Schmidt (1991) compiled is its construct validity. Have they really included all the important aspects into their framework? One possible shortcoming of this framework might be that in spite of providing a sound conceptualization of the four levels of L2 motivation, several additional aspects could have been considered at each level of the construct. For example, the classroom level only mentions the role of teachers implicitly by referring to notions such as relevance, feedback, materials and to the issue of extrinsic rewards. In addition, the classroom level fails to be concerned with the impact of teachers. Similarly, the outside the classroom level does not acknowledge the impact of parents and other socially significant actors. It also interesting to see that when this framework was proposed, the lingua franca aspect of English was still largely ignored (Jenkins, 2007), therefore, when speakers were considered, only the role of native-speakers were added without acknowledging the potential influence of non-native speakers as well (Kachru, 1992; Widdowson, 2003).

14 Table 2.2 Crookes and Schmidt’s theory of motivation (based on Crookes & Schmidt, 1991)

2 A Summary of Theoretical Considerations The micro level Attention To arouse and maintain curiosity The classroom level Preliminaries Interest Activities Relevance Need for affiliation Feedback Issue of extrinsic rewards Effects of student self-perception Past experiences Materials Interest The syllabus/curriculum level Needs analysis Self-management strategies Outside the classroom (long-term learning) Contact with native speakers of the target language

Another influential and classic framework of L2 motivation is Dörnyei’s (1994) extended model that offered a step forward within the L2 motivation field by enlarging the Gardnerian paradigm. Similarly to Crookes and Schmidt (1991), Dörnyei (1994, p. 280) created a multi-dimensional motivational framework incorporating the language, the learner and the learning-situation level. The language level (social dimension) includes ethnolinguistic, cultural-affective, intellectual, and pragmatic values and attitudes attached to the target language; these values and attitudes are, to a large extent, determined by the social milieu in which learning takes place. Based on Gardner’s (1985) work, Dörnyei differentiated between integrative and instrumental motivational subsystems. The learner level (personal dimension) concerns various fairly stable personality traits that the learner has previously developed. Some of these are language-specific (e.g. components of linguistic self-confidence, self-efficacy, language use anxiety and perceived L2 competence), while others are related to learning and achieving in general (e.g., need for achievement, causal attributions). The learning-situation level (educational dimension) is associated with situationspecific motives, rooted in various aspects of language learning in a classroom setting. At this level three main types of motivational sources can be distinguished:

2.2 Classic Theories of L2 Motivation

15

1. Course-specific motivational components, which are related to the syllabus, the teaching materials, the teaching method and the learning tasks, such as interest, relevance, expectancy and satisfaction. 2. Teacher-specific motivational components, which are related to the teacher’s behavior, personality and teaching style and include the affiliate motive and the authority type as well as the direct socialization of motivation (modelling, task presentation and feedback). 3. Group-specific motivational components, which are related to the dynamics of the learner group and subsume the goal-orientedness of the group, the classroom goal structure, the norm and reward system and group cohesion. The three levels of Dörnyei’s model drew on different research traditions. The language level was clearly inspired by the work of Gardner and the sociopsychological paradigm of L2 motivation research by incorporating the two dimensions (integrative and instrumental) most often associated with Gardner’s work. Aspects of the learner level can be traced back to expectancy-value theories in psychology, which have played a significant role in motivational psychology in the past few decades. These theories aim to explain human motivation in terms of it being a function of expectancy of success and the value of this success. A part of this paradigm is the ‘need for achievement’ theory, which is usually associated with Atkinson’s work (e.g., Atkinson & Raynor, 1974), as well as ‘attribution theory’ (successes and failures are attributed to various causes), ‘self-efficacy theory’ (judging one’s own competence) and ‘self-worth theory’ (maintaining one’s own selfesteem). The learning-situation level is associated, among others, with goal-theories within educational psychology (e.g., Ames, 1992), and the field of group dynamics in social psychology, and empirical work carried out in a Hungarian context (Clément, Dörnyei, & Noels, 1994). At the time, L2 motivation was hardly even considered as a process, let alone a dynamically changing phenomenon, so it is not surprising that interactional issues are not considered here. However, all the components present important issues pertaining to classroom motivation; therefore, the framework can provide a useful backdrop to the investigation of the dynamic nature of L2 motivation in the classroom. Another somewhat similar framework is offered by Williams and Burden (1997), who view motivation from a social constructivist perspective, whereby the social and contextual influences on individual motivation are acknowledged; therefore, according to their theory, social context is of central importance. Within the social context reasons for learning, sustaining effort and decision-making processes form highly inter-related and inter-active processes. In addition, Williams and Burden’s theory, similarly to the other process-oriented models discussed later, takes into account the temporal dimension of motivation as well. Motivation is conceptualized as consisting of three interrelated stages: reasons for doing something → deciding to do something → sustaining the effort or persisting. It is explained that initiating motivation (first two stages) and sustaining motivation (third stage) are not linked in a linear fashion, hence, the three stages are represented by a triangle.

16

2 A Summary of Theoretical Considerations

According to Williams and Burden’s interactive model, L2 motivation is broken down into several factors along the organizing principle of external/internal dimensions. The external dimension involves the role of significant others, school and social environment, while the internal factors subsume interest, value, locus of control, attitudes and other affective and demographic features (Table 2.3). Based on the renewed interest in L2 motivation research in the 1990s, Tremblay and Gardner proposed an extended version of Gardner’s earlier socio-educational model of L2 learning by including goal setting, casual attributions, attention and persistence, in other words, several psychologically driven phenomena (Tremblay & Gardner, 1995). This model does not only offer relevant issues pertaining to L2 motivation but serves as a hypothetical model to be tested empirically. Tremblay and Garnder’s quantitative study involved 17-year-old participants studying French in Table 2.3 Williams and Burden’s framework of L2 motivation (based on Williams & Burden, 1997) Internal factors

External factors

Intrinsic interest of activity • Arousal of curiosity • Optimal degree of challenge Perceived value of activity • Personal relevance • Anticipated value of outcomes • Intrinsic value attributed to the activity Sense of agency • Locus of causality • Locus of control • Ability to set appropriate goals Mastery • Feelings of competence • Awareness of developing skills and mastery in a chosen area • Self-efficacy Self-concept • Realistic awareness of personal strengths and weaknesses in skills required • Personal definitions and judgements of success and failure • Self-worth concern • Learned helplessness Attitudes • To language learning in general • To the target language • To the target language community and culture Other affective states • Confidence • Anxiety, fear Developmental age and stage Gender

Significant others • Parents • Teachers • Peers The nature of interaction with significant others • Mediated learning experiences • The nature and amount of feedback • Rewards • The nature and amount of appropriate praise • Punishments, sanctions The learning environment • Comfort • Resources • Time of day, week, year • Size of class and school • Class and school ethos The broader context • Wider family networks • The local education system • Conflicting interests • Cultural norms • Societal expectations and attitudes

2.2 Classic Theories of L2 Motivation

LANGUAGE ATTITUDES -Attitudes toward L2 speakers -Integrative orientation -Interest in foreign languages -Attitudes toward the L2 course -Attitudes toward the L2 teacher -Instrumental orientation

17

GOAL SALIENCE -Goal specifity -Goal frequency

VALENCE -Desire to learn L2 -Attitudes toward learning L2

MOTIVATIONAL BAHAVIOUR -Attention -Motivational intensity -Persistence

SELF-EFFICACY -Perforamance expectancy -L2 use anxiety -L2 class anxiety

ADAPTIVE ATTRIBUTIONS

A C H I E V E M E N T

FRENCH LANGUAGE DOMINANCE

Mot i vat i on Fig. 2.2 Tremblay and Gardner’s (1995) motivational model (based on p. 510)

a francophone secondary school in northern Ontario. Based on structural equation modelling, the following motivational model was verified (Fig. 2.2). The most striking feature of this new model is that it lacks a strong integrative component (one of the most important elements of Gardner’s motivation theory). The language attitude → motivational behavior sequence is separated by various mediating variables, partly based on Crookes and Schmidt (1991), while L2 motivation is defined as cognitive processes and motivational behavior (see the dotted square in Fig. 2.2). As a result, attitudes toward various aspects of L2 learning were treated in an ambiguous way. On the one hand, motivation did not encompass attitudes toward the L2 speakers, the teacher, and the course, rather attitudes toward learning the L2 were subsumed under the category of valence as part of motivation. This separation does not seem to be justifiable as in the empirical data cited in the article the language attitudes → valence path is connected by a 0.99 coefficient indicating that the latent concepts measured by the two scales were highly similar. In addition, the reported model-data fit measures do not seem to be particularly high (e.g., GFI = 0.70), suggesting that other paths, for example, a direct path from language attitudes to motivated behavior might have produced better results. Accordingly, Tremblay and Gardner (1995) stress that their “model is not carved in stone but provides initial support for development of more elaborate motivational theories of L2 learning” (p. 516). They also identify some of the main directions for subsequent L2 motivational studies, for example, goal setting, self-efficacy, causal attribution, language attitudes and motivational behavior.

18

2 A Summary of Theoretical Considerations

The final theory that should be mentioned here is the widely cited selfdetermination theory which posits that regulations (i.e., behavior control) create a continuum from controlled (extrinsic orientation) to self-determined (intrinsic orientation) forms of motivation (Deci & Ryan, 1985, 2002; Deci, Vallerland, Pelletier, & Ryan, 1991; Ryan & Deci, 2000). These forms of motivation are distinguished by the degree of internalization, that is, the extent to which individuals identify with the given regulation. The positive end of the continuum is intrinsic orientation; the non-self-determined end of the scale is amotivation. The latter suggests a complete lack of motivation on the learner’s part. Extrinsic orientation contains four subcategories according to the level of internationalization: external, introjected, identified and integrated regulations. Intrinsic motivation includes knowledge, accomplishment and stimulation (Noels, 2001a). Kimberly Noels and her colleagues have initiated a series of systematic research projects into how self-determination theory may provide a broader framework for L2 motivation research. They have also investigated how different classroomrelated variables, for example, the teacher’s communication style, students’ anxiety, perceived competence and motivation relate to the self-determination continuum (Noels, 2001a, 2001b; Noels, Clément, & Pelletier, 1999, 2001; Noels, Pelletier, Clément, & Vallerland, 2000). Moreover, Noels (2001a) has proposed a heuristic model of the motivational process, which accounts for both the interpersonal and intergroup aspects of L2 motivation. In this model six levels contribute in a stepwise manner to linguistic and non-linguistic outcomes in L2 motivation (Noels, 2001). The starting level is formed by learners’ immediate social contact (provided by the L2 community, teachers and family members), the next level consists of learners’ fundamental needs (their social identity, relatedness, autonomy and competence) and it influences integrative, intrinsic or extrinsic learning orientations. These are followed by intentions and engagement in learning including willingness to communicate, effort and persistence, which all lead to L2 use in and outside the classroom. Finally, language use results in linguistic and non-linguistic outcomes. This heuristic model serves as an excellent example of how one can operationalize L2 motivation, while taking into account both the personal and interpersonal dimensions. However, upon surveying the model, several questions arise. Although the separate treatment of social and personal identity can be justified, I find it interesting that social identity is treated as a fundamental need, while personal identity is not, as it appears to be an outcome variable. The treatment of orientations is rather simplistic and stands unsupported in Noels’ arguments published elsewhere (e.g., Noels et al., 2001b). Apart from the intrinsic/extrinsic dichotomy, only integrativeness is mentioned but less self-determined orientations seem to be lacking. Moreover, willingness to communicate is usually considered to be a personal variable (MacIntyre, Clément, Dörnyei, & Noels, 1998) but, in this model, it is considered as an interpersonal one. Still, this model motivated a large number of research projects that are still currently relevant (Noels et al., 2019). Based on the above overview, we can see that these theories did offer any perspectives on the classroom processes despite the fact that Crookes and Schmidt (1991) have argued that “the basic motivational issues are the same” (p. 494) in various

2.2 Classic Theories of L2 Motivation

19

settings of learning. In the theories that can be considered ‘classic’ in L2 motivation research due to their recognized and established value in the 1990s and beyond, a number of specific classroom-related notions are defined and discussed. Different teacher-initiated roles and activities are mentioned, such as feedback, materials, direct socialization of motivation, attitudes toward and evaluation of the L2 teachers. Explicit classroom-level variables are included in both Crookes and Schmidt (1991) and Dörnyei (1994), however, only the latter discusses group-dynamical issues being related to L2 motivation. Williams and Burden (1997) mention size and ethos of class and Tremblay and Gardner (1995) include L2 class anxiety, which is an individual variable but one that is shaped by the group-dynamical aspects of learning experiences. Although Dörnyei (1994) touches upon goals related to classroom learning, only Williams and Burden (1997) incorporate the interactional aspect of motivation into their framework. Based on these theories, a classroom-sensitive motivational theory should take into account both student and teacher-related issues as well as interaction between these two agents. Another issue that is definitely missing from these theories is the longitudinal nature of motivation: the ebbs and flows and changes over time. However, unlike interactional issues, the process characteristics of L2 motivation has been addressed in various theories, as presented in the next subchapter.

2.3 The Process Perspective in L2 Motivation The most elaborate process model in the L2 motivation field is proposed by Dörnyei and Ottó (Dörnyei, 2000, 2001a; Dörnyei & Ottó, 1998). Drawing on Heckhausen and Kuhl’s Action Control Theory (e.g., Heckhausen, 1991; Heckhausen & Kuhl, 1985), the motivational process is broken down into several discrete temporal segments. It includes preactional, actional and postactional phases with motivational influences and action sequences attached to each stage. In the preactional phase, goal-setting and intentions are seen as the most salient processes. In the actional phase, completing tasks and ongoing self-regulation of the learning processes are paramount. Finally, in the post-actional stage, (further) planning is crucial that subsumes forming causal attributions and so is deciding on future intentions. Motivational influences relate to these functions in a logical way. Hence, the model describes how initial wishes and desires are first transformed into goals and then into intentions, and how these intentions are acted on, leading to the accomplishment of the goal and/or the termination of action. The process is concluded by the final evaluation. One of the strengths of this conceptualization in L2 motivation is that Dörnyei and Ottó (1998) added motivational influences, implying that motivation is interactional and is shaped by not only personal efforts and convictions, but also by contextual experiences and significant others. In each phase of L2 motivation, general or particular environmental as well as classroom-related aspects are added to the model, echoing Ushioda’s qualitative findings in which the process of motivation is

20

2 A Summary of Theoretical Considerations

basically shaped by either motivation deriving from past experiences, or by motivation directed toward future goals (Ushioda, 1998, 2001). L2 motivation in the classroom may benefit from such a process-oriented approach as it can justify and provide a framework for both the temporal short-term changes in L2 motivation while maintaining the state aspects of motivation.

2.4 Self-Related Concepts in L2 Motivation Parallel to the development of the process model of L2 motivation, it has become apparent that when the longitudinal aspect of L2 motivation is considered, one cannot disregard self-related issues in research. Despite the fact that a few years ago we dedicated a full edited volume to the investigation of self-concepts in L2 motivation (Csizér & Magid, 2014) which was seen as a follow-up work to the findings of an earlier edited volume dedicated to self issues as well (Dörnyei & Ushioda, 2009), there are no readily available summaries on relevant self-related concepts in L2 motivation. Therefore, in the following section, I will summarize issues pertaining to self-related concepts in L2 motivation which are applicable to the empirical studies in the Hungarian context.

2.4.1 The Role of Self-Confidence and Self-Efficacy in L2 Motivation One of the first self-related concepts of L2 motivation research, introduced by Clément (1980) and Clément, Gardner, and Smythe (1977), is linguistic selfconfidence. Linguistic self-confidence subsumes the individuals’ beliefs about their abilities to reach goals or finish tasks successfully and is concerned with a generalized perception of one’s coping potentials, relevant to a range of tasks and subject domains. This concept is closely related to self-efficacy in motivational and educational psychology. The main difference between self-confidence and self-efficacy is that although self-confidence has a cognitive component, it is largely a socially grounded construct as opposed to self-efficacy, which is entirely cognitive in nature (cf. Bandura, 1997). Moreover, self-efficacy is more specific than self-confidence as it is always linked to a concrete task (see Dörnyei & Kormos, 2000). Linguistic selfconfidence can be operationalized in at least two ways: It can refer to the learning of a particular language (see, for example, research done by Clément), or it can be measured as referring to L2 learning in a general sense. Self-confidence can be influenced by several variables. In Clément’s model, the main antecedents of self-confidence are the quality and quantity of social contact that can lead to motivation in a multiculturally-composed community. According to Clément, self-confidence does not contribute to motivation in unicultural contexts.

2.4 Self-Related Concepts in L2 Motivation

21

The hypothetical model was tested by Clément and Kruidinier (1985) and their results supported the causal sequences: Integrativeness affected the quantity and quality of contact in a positive way while the fear of assimilation played a negative role. Contact, in turn, had a significant and positive effect on linguistic self-confidence, which was causally and positively linked to motivation. Both motivation and aptitude influenced non-linguistic and linguistic outcomes. In addition, it was revealed that motivation had a stronger effect on non-linguistic outcomes, while aptitude affected linguistic outcomes to a larger extent. An unexpected but potentially important result of the study indicated that the effect of integrativeness was not only mediated in multicultural contexts but was also directly linked to motivation. In a similar vein, Clément, Dörnyei, and Noels (1994) were successful at proving that the role of linguistic self-confidence was equally important in a unicultural environment. Based on their investigation in Hungary, they proposed a tricomponential complex with integrativeness, linguistic self-confidence and the appraisal of classroom environment all three said to be influencing L2 motivation. In addition, Dörnyei, Csizér, and Németh (2006) found two important results concerning the role of self-confidence in foreign language learning motivation. First, self-confidence, reflecting a confident, anxiety-free belief that the mastery of an L2 is well within the learner’s reach, strongly correlated with the milieu (i.e., the general perception of the importance of foreign languages coming from the learners’ immediate environment [e.g., in the school context as well as in friends’ and parents’ views]). This indicates that self-confidence is, at least partly, socially constructed and its importance is underlined in the self-determination theory, in which competence proves to be a fundamental psychological need (Noels et al., 2019). Additionally, the same study showed self-confidence to be related to students’ self-reported cultural interest (Dörnyei et al., 2006), which was an indirect contact measure (i.e., the appreciation of cultural products associated with the particular L2 and conveyed by the media). These results are in agreement with Clément’s (1980) relational findings between self-confidence as well as the quality and quantity of multicultural contact. Further ways of measuring the role of self-confidence were provided by different researchers. Kormos and Dörnyei (2004), for example, explored the influence of self-confidence in task motivation. Their findings indicated a strong correlation with various output measures. More recently, positive beliefs about self-confidence have been linked to L2 motivation (Lou & Noels, 2019) within the domain of the mindset theory (Dweck, 1996, 2006) as well as its positive role emphasized in content and language integrated learning (Hüttner, Dalton-Puffer, & Smit, 2013) but these issues have not been tested in Hungary yet. Apart from self-confidence, the role of self-efficacy has also been investigated in a Hungarian setting. Self-efficacy beliefs focus on performing particular tasks, as Bandura’s (1986) influential definition explains: “people’s judgments of their capabilities to organize and execute courses of action required to attain designated types of performances” (p. 391). For example, in language teaching, it is the extent to which students can perform various foreign language related tasks successfully (Bandura, 1986, 1988). The role of self-efficacy was found to be decisive in a number

22

2 A Summary of Theoretical Considerations

of studies focusing on second/foreign language learning in both Hungarian and nonHungarian contexts (e.g., Mills, Pajeras, & Herron, 2007; Piniel & Csizér, 2013, 2015; Tremblay & Gardner, 1995). Even more importantly, self-efficacy was linked to task motivation (Kormos & Wilby, 2019) and project-based learning (Park & Hiver, 2017), and Bandura (1997) pointed out that self-efficacy beliefs might be of more important sources of achievement than actual knowledge or skills.

2.4.2 L2 Motivational Self System Based on the data analyzed in Dörnyei et al. (2006) several issues have emerged pertaining to the contextual relevance of L2 motivation. Perhaps the most thoughtprovoking quandary was that despite marked contextual differences between Canada and Hungary, integrativeness proved to be one of the most important antecedent variables in explaining language learners’ efforts in both contexts (Gardner, 1985; Dörnyei et al., 2006). The interpretation of the Hungarian data did not seem possible without some additional theoretical considerations (Csizér & Dörnyei, 2005; Dörnyei & Csizér, 2002). This led Dörnyei to conceptualize integrativeness in a more general framework, which included the learner’s identification processes within the selfconcept (Dörnyei, 2005). Such line of reasoning was not unparalleled in the field: In Japan, Yashima (2000) proved the relevance of an identification process with a global community of English speakers, while in the Indonesian context, Lamb (2004) found a bicultural identity among Indonesian teenagers, part of which was linked to their home country context while another part to the globalized world. In a similar vein, a logical explanation explored by Dörnyei and Csizér (2002) was that integrativeness constituted an actual intention to integrate into the L2 community as well as an identification process that included the acceptance of values related to L2 knowledge. This idea led to the formulation of the L2 Motivational Self System (Dörnyei, 2005, 2009b). The basis of the L2 Motivational Self System can be found in theories of self and identity in mainstream psychology, describing the relationships between selfconcepts and behavior. In order to formulate the L2 Motivational Self System theory, Dörnyei (2005) had drawn on Markus and Nurius’ (1986) theory of possible selves, and Higgins’ (1987) theory of self-discrepancy. According to Dörnyei’s (2005) conceptualization, the student’s learning behavior (i.e., how much effort they are willing to invest into language learning, and how persistent they are), is largely affected by three distinct constructs: the ideal L2 Self , the ought-to L2 self , and the L2 learning experience. While the ideal L2 Self captures the extent to which the learner can imagine themselves as highly proficient users of L2, the ought-to L2 self encapsulates the external pressures that the individual is aware of during the learning process. Finally, the L2 learning experience involves situated motives that relate to the immediate learning environment, and includes attitudes toward classroom processes (Dörnyei, 2005, 2009b). Consequently, the model not only includes self-related constructs, but also a component connected to the learning context, thus

2.4 Self-Related Concepts in L2 Motivation

23

acknowledging the fact that the two self-guides do not impact on the learning process in an isolated way. The model has generated an exceptionally large body of research (Boo, Dörnyei, & Ryan, 2015) that I have discussed in the Palgrave Macmillan handbook of motivation for language learning (Csizér, 2019b). Therefore, here I will only concentrate on a small number of contextually important issues. First of all, context itself is an important variable in shaping the components of L2 Motivational Self System. Lamb (2012) found the role of Ideal L2 self was only prominent in urban settings, while the results of Islam, Lamb and Chambers (2013) indicated relations between the role of English at a national level and the construction of ideal English-speaking self. Kormos and Kiddle (2013) observed some social economic factors and mapped significant differences between students of high and low socio-economic status showing that the latter group had more difficulty in developing their ideal L2 selves. Another important issue is differentiating between L2 selves and multilingual selves. Several studies have shown that when students are learning multiple languages concurrently (see Ushioda, 2017; Henry, 2017 for more details), which is the reality in many Hungarian contexts, the interaction among various language-related selves should be considered. Moreover, in our current globalized world, we cannot disregard Ushioda’s (2017) and Henry’s (2017) argument, namely that the L2 Motivational Self System should recognize the desire to become multilingual rather than the learning of specific foreign languages. As a result, Ushioda (2017) argued that the focus of language teaching should be directed at developing learners’ ideal multilingual selves. In addition, Henry (2017) showed that an ideal multilingual self can emerge as a product of positive interactions between the self-guides of the different languages that the individual knows or is learning. Testing these ideas in a subsequent study, Thorsen, Henry, and Cliffordson (2017) demonstrated how, in the context of multilingual language learning, the ideal multilingual self can have a positive influence on the ideal L2 self, and can thus have a distinct function in generating effort needed to learn a language other than English. When considering the classroom context, we need to acknowledge some teacherrelated studies as well. First, Kubanyiova (2009) described teachers’ possible selves in order to bridge the gaps between selves, motivation and professional development. She concluded that selves were important parts of teacher cognition and that professional development was influenced by the differences found among teachers’ possible selves, such as ideal and feared selves. In a similar fashion, Hiver (2013) linked the role of possible selves to the problem-solving ability of teachers. Kubanyiova (2015) furthered the investigation on teachers’ selves by mapping them in the classroom context. She managed to show how teachers’ possible selves influenced classroom interactions and, as a result, students’ work. She also concluded that teachers’ possible selves could thwart the learning processes of the students when they [i.e., students] were not able to take full responsibility for their own learning. This means that both in-service and pre-service teacher training should put greater emphasis on the development on teachers’ possible selves. Another important notion that might be considered here is the issue of the apprenticeship of observation (Borg, 2003). Teachers teaching at present are (former) language learners, thus their teaching might

24

2 A Summary of Theoretical Considerations

be shaped by the way they used to learn foreign languages. A further example of this ideas comes from Thompson and Vásquez’s (2015) study, who based their investigation on narratives while exploring how teachers’ learning experiences shaped their selves: One of the most important influencing issues was that that selves were affected by important and influential people in the participants’ milieu and thus related to ‘others’ as well (cf., ought-to self-own vs ought-self-others). Finally, Sahakyan, Lamb, and Chambers (2018) investigated the differences between ideal selves (what selves one can imagine) and feasible selves (what can be reached in reality). They found that teachers in their early career had very well-developed ideal selves that had stemmed from their previous learning experiences as well as from the efforts their own teachers had made. In many instances, the ideal selves constructed in this fashion had to be turned into feasible selves as a result of their own teaching experiences, as ideal selves constituted unreachable ideals. This feasible self then related to expectations pertaining to students’ work, their successes and failures. Unfortunately, such teacher-focused studies are completely missing from the Hungarian research palette.

2.5 Dynamic Perspective in L2 Motivation Longitudinal approaches to exploring L2 motivation have undoubtedly raised issues regarding the changing nature of effort invested in language learning. However, it was the emergence of the complex dynamic system theory (CDST) in applied linguistics (de Bot, Lowie, & Verspoor, 2007; Larsen-Freeman & Cameron, 2008) that made L2 motivation researchers fully realize the limitations of cross-sectional approaches when investigating how much effort students are willing to invest in learning. CDST is not a single theory but a collection of a number of tenets that drive both empirical and theoretical work in science, including applied linguistics and language pedagogy. Larsen-Freeman (2015) summarized these tenets in lessons on CDST and L2 motivation (pp. 11–18). As its name suggest, the dynamic nature of the phenomenon is crucial, and change is seen as an integral part of the processes under investigation. As change occurs over various timeframes, it is important to understand that “what appear to be periods of stability at larger timeframes are made up of fluctuating motivation levels at shorter timeframes” (p. 13). It is a system theory suggesting that it is not the individual, unidimensional characteristics that should be investigated. These characteristics interact with each other and organize themselves into various systems and, hence, the whole system should be mapped and analyzed. Within these systems, the crucial feature is the relationships among these unidimensional characteristics which make the system complex, as a result of the interaction of the elements. These interactions are not only sensitive to initial conditions and feedback (see the importance of creating initial conditions for motivation and motivational feedback in Dörnyei, 2001a) but they can also enter into states when the outcome proves to be unstable and unpredictable. These interactional relations forming complex dynamic systems are also context-dependent: They do not exist in a vacuum but can be influenced by contextual factors. As Larsen-Freeman put it

2.5 Dynamic Perspective in L2 Motivation

25

(2015, p. 16) “with the coupling of the learner and the learning environment, neither the learner nor the environment is seen as independent, and the environment is not seen as background to the main developmental drama.” If one looks at the classroom, it does not take a lot of imagination to realize that this social context is a complex dynamic system par excellence. The dynamic complexity of L2 motivation in classroom learning stems from not only the interaction of the various actors within a social setting, but also from the fact that motivation as a state, trait and process guide learning over a number of lessons and over a period of weeks, months and school years. In addition, student motivation interacts with not only other individual variables, such as anxiety, self-efficacy or aptitude but also with other personal and social characteristics (see The Douglas Fir Model, 2016). A number of empirical studies pertaining to the dynamic nature of L2 motivation has been collected by Dörnyei, MacIntyre, and Henry (2015). The empirical studies relevant to classroom motivation within the CDST paradigm utilize various timeframes. For example, MacIntyre and Serroul (2015), investigated how motivation related to oral tasks changed over time. Their innovative research design captured minute-by-minute changes in levels of motivation as students completed speaking tasks on different topics. These changes were impacted by several trait (pre-task self-related motivation) and state (task difficulty, necessary vocabulary/grammar to complete the tasks) characteristics. Using a much longer timeframe in a Hungarian setting, Piniel and Csizér (2015) investigated the individual difference variables of university students in constellation over a semester-long writing seminar. They not only detected non-linear negative changes over time for language learning experiences and ought-to L2 selves but showed that strong ideal L2 selves remained stable. In other words, despite the fact that university students majoring in language had strong and stable visions of themselves as well as their future selves pertaining to the use of the English language, this stable system was still adversely influenced by negative experiences and external expectations.

2.6 Summary It is important to understand that the theories and models described so far should not be considered as competing theories and models. I think that the newer theories and models do not negate the importance and validity of earlier ones but should be seen as complementing one another in describing the complex issues pertaining to L2 motivation. It is outside the scope of this monograph to provide an overall critical synthesis of the L2 motivation field; hence, my modest aim was to collect the relevant theoretical considerations and empirical studies that informed L2 motivation research in Hungary in the past 30 years. It is important to point out that there seems to be some theoretical deficiency in L2 motivation pertaining to classroom learning. There is no current theoretical framework that can inform classroom-related empirical studies, neither qualitative nor quantitative or cross-sectional nor one that takes the principles of CDST into consideration. While classic theories on L2 motivation

26

2 A Summary of Theoretical Considerations

had managed to capture classroom-characteristics to a certain extent, later efforts in L2 motivation research concentrated more on empirical rather than theoretical innovation. As Dörnyei (2019b) put it: “the search for relevant theoretical paradigms continues” (p. 54).

Chapter 3

Research Pertaining to Student Motivation in Hungary

This part of the monograph aims to summarize research studies in Hungary in connection with students’ motivation. I will follow a topical approach and the chapter is divided into several subchapters dealing with different issues regarding the investigation of L2 motivation from language choice and the relations of various individual difference variables and motivation to various classroom issues. In addition, I will detail research results on special needs learners in Hungary. In terms of research methodological considerations, a wide variety of studies are presented from crosssectional quantitative project to longitudinal, qualitative investigations. (For another summary of Hungarian research studies, see Medgyes & Nikolov, 2014). I will follow various strategies to present the topics. I will include more details about the studies published in Hungarian. If results have been published in English, I aim to provide a succinct summary of those for the readers. I would like to reiterate the fact that this chapter discusses issues investigated in Hungary and I do not intend to imply that these issues are universally important in other contexts. The wide variety of studies only present the perceived importance of L2 motivation research in Hungary.

3.1 Language Choice in the Hungarian Education System One of the main contextual characteristics of the Hungarian school education is that there is no designated compulsory language to be learnt. Perhaps, this regulation is easier to understand if I remind the reader that Russian was the only compulsory foreign language at all levels of education during the communist era (1949–1989). This created rather negative attitudes toward the language and its speakers. In addition, Russian was associated with the ruling political system at the time, and the teaching of Russian was also heavily politicized (Illés, 1984). This meant that when the compulsory status of Russian was abolished overnight in 1989, no other foreign © Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020 K. Csizér, Second Language Learning Motivation in a European Context: The Case of Hungary, Second Language Learning and Teaching, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-64462-8_3

27

28

3 Research Pertaining to Student Motivation in Hungary

language replaced its compulsory status. As I outlined in Chapter 1, this liberal disposition to language choice is thwarted by a number of external factors, such as centrally limited choices in primary education for five languages and the availability of teachers as well as group-related variables in secondary schools. Still, the variety of languages being studied provides ample research opportunities to investigate students’ dispositions and motivation toward learning different foreign languages. Although several studies show that English is the most popular foreign language at each level of the Hungarian education (Dörnyei, Csizér, & Németh, 2006; Öveges & Csizér, 2018), students in secondary grammar schools (between the ages of 10 December 14– 18, depending on the type of school they attend) are currently required to learn two foreign languages, which creates, by definition, a large market for learners of languages other than English. There are the two basic ways to investigate students’ motivation concerning multiple languages. One way is to compare students’ disposition toward different foreign languages irrespectively whether students are learning (or planning to learn) the foreign language or not. Alternatively, L2 motivation can be studied in a synchronous way: when students are learning two (or more) languages simultaneously. There are several examples for the first type of study. Dörnyei et al. (2006) largescale investigation mapped students’ dispositions toward five languages: English, German, French, Italian and Russian. Data was collected from students in Year 8 at the end of their primary education. As the main results of this study have been well documented in international publications, there is no need to reiterate them here, but I would like to highlight two important conclusions. First, the sample of the study consisted of students who were at the end of their primary education, a time when they had to choose the particular secondary school they wanted to continue their studies at, and the languages they wanted to learn, thus creating a meaningful opportunity to measure choice motivation. This design gave us the opportunity to investigate dispositions toward several foreign languages and enabled us to establish a rank-order among the languages at the time of data collection. Three waves of data collection over more than a decade (indicate which years 1992–2004) have shown the changes in the willingness to learn various foreign languages, or, to put it less subtly, the (un)willingness to learn languages other than English. The second important conclusion of this study was that with the help of multivariate statistical analysis, we came to an understanding that to a varying degree, there was always a group of students who did not want to study a particular foreign language: this was true even for English. A more recent nationwide study in Hungary explored the state of foreign language education and took into account the differences between students learning English and German (Öveges & Csizér, 2018). I have already cited some results when describing the Hungarian context, but it is worth mentioning that the study included both student-related questionnaire data as well. The most important language related results are that language learning instruction is different in English and in German classes, in terms of what type of skills are taught and how much they are practiced (Albert, Tankó, & Piniel, 2018a, b). Students learning German claimed that they

3.1 Language Choice in the Hungarian Education System

29

spoke Hungarian more often in class compared to what learners of English reported. In terms of the ratio of teacher-student talking time, it seems that in German classes, teachers talked more than in English classes. In German lessons, there were more translation and fewer listening comprehension tasks compared to what students of English reported. It must be noted that these results were based on students’ perceptions and neither teacher-based nor observation data complemented students’ opinions. As for students’ motivational dispositions, two types of differences emerged. There were differences between learners of English and German, but these differences were confounded by whether students were learning English or German as a first or second foreign language. It seems that in Hungary, where first and second foreign languages are introduced at different times in compulsory education, the order in which students select their chosen languages is crucial in terms of their motivation. Characteristically, German-related dispositions were more positive for students for whom German was a second foreign language (i.e., they had learned English before German) and not a first foreign language. In terms of choice motivation between English and German, Nikolov’s (2003) a large-scale nationwide study in Hungary provided information on the changes in L2 motivation in compulsory education by collecting data from Year 6, 8, 10 and 12 students learning either English or German as their first L2. The study also informs us about the factors responsible for shaping students’ initial choices with respect to which foreign language to learn. Her results indicated a strong correlation between the socio-economic status of learners’ parents and their language choice with students from families with higher socio-economic status choosing English more often than German. In addition, students in higher years were less motivated to continue with foreign language learning, which further indicates the importance of L2 motivation in compulsory education to counteract increasing demotivation. The simultaneous investigation of L2 motivation in students learning two foreign languages is rather rare. One such study was conducted by one of my MA students, Gabriella Lukács. She had found that the preferred order of foreign languages studied affected the impact of the ideal L2 selves on students’ motivated behavior. While ideal German-speaking selves had a systematically positive effect on English-speaking selves (irrespective of the order of learning), students’ ideal English-speaking selves exerted a negative influence on the ideal German-speaking selves in cases where students were made to learn German first, and English second (Csizér & Lukács, 2010). Based on the above cited studies, it can be concluded that students in Hungarian compulsory education have a preferred order of learning foreign languages with English being the top choice, followed by German and Spanish/French/Italian (Albert et al., 2018b), and that their choices are mediated by their socio-economic status. This preferred order is mirrored in their motivational dispositions as well, which was the highest for students who were able to learn the languages in the order they wanted to. It appears that choice motivation has a lasting impact on students’ long-term motivation and engagement with the language. Findings such as these, undoubtedly put pressure on schools to cater for students’ needs as much as possible, and educators need to find ways to motivate students to learn languages other than English.

30

3 Research Pertaining to Student Motivation in Hungary

3.2 Motivation and Related Individual Difference Variables 3.2.1 The Canadian Influences Despite the fact that L2 motivation is seen as one of the most important variables that influences students’ success in foreign language learning, it is not sufficient to investigate students’ motivational dispositions: The extent of motivation relating to other individual variables should also be explored. The importance of investigating individual difference variables in concert has been increasingly acknowledged in individual difference research (Ryan, 2019) because these variables might not only relate to one another but also interact in shaping the outcome of learning (DeKeyser, 2012). One of the first large-scale Hungarian studies tapped into several individual difference variables in relation to primary school students’ efforts invested in learning five different foreign languages (Dörnyei et al., 2006). To understand the selected variables of the study, it is important to point out a few issues. The first round of data collection took place in 1994, and in order to compare the results consistently over a period of 10 years, the instrument had not been changed over the years, despite the fact that the international L2 motivation field had been developing rather rapidly. In addition, the Canadian research results were highly important at the time, therefore, when designing the first questionnaire, much of it was motivated by the Canadian results. As self-reported data was collected, two scales were used as dependent scales operationalizing L2 motivation: Language Choice and Intended Effort. In terms of the antecedent variables, several motivational disposition-type of scales were included such as Integrativeness and Instrumental motivation. More importantly, a number of attitudinal and belief type variables were measured, including attitudes toward L2 speakers/community, vitality of L2 community and cultural interest. Two additional scales completed the study: firstly, students’ self-confidence, which was one of the first self-related variables to find its way to L2 motivation research, based on the work of Canadian scholars, and, secondly, milieu, which subsumed the perceived support of students’ immediate social milieu. Based on the results of the relationships of the above scales detailed in Dörnyei et al. (2006), a few follow-up studies were carried out in the Hungarian context. The most important theoretical outcome has been the reconceptualization of the notions of integrativeness and instrumentality into Dörnyei’s (2005, 2009b) L2 Motivational Self System. I have written at length about this theory elsewhere (Csizér, 2019b) and its prominent position in the international hall of fame of L2 motivational theories (Boo, Dörnyei, & Ryan, 2015), therefore I will not repeat myself here. Interestingly, though, while the investigation of self-related aspects has flourished, the impact of attitudinal scales on learning outcomes has been largely ignored. There are hardly any studies about the various learning-related attitudes and their impact on L2 motivation in the Hungarian context. More interestingly, I have no knowledge of any international studies that would have mapped the role of attitudes in L2 motivation and learning outcomes in a systematic manner. This is rather curious as

3.2 Motivation and Related Individual Difference Variables

31

attitude-based studies provide a versatile and flexible approach to the investigation of various aspects of the learning processes in different contexts and timeframes. The investigation of cultural interest was taken up in contact-related studies in the Hungarian context and used as an indirect contact variable (see Sect. 3.4). Selfconfidence had been studied in a more situated way when we conceptualized it as self-efficacy beliefs (Piniel & Csizér, 2013). Milieu, that is contextual support as perceived by learners has been studied in relation to dyslexic and Deaf language learners in Hungary (see Sect. 3.6) as well as in a comparative study about the impact of parents and teachers on the components of L2 Motivational Self System (see Sect. 3.3). The Canadian influence on the Hungarian research field can further be illustrated by Clément, Dörnyei, and Noels’ (1994) study, involving secondary school students in Budapest. This study is especially important in light of the fact that it proposes a tripartial motivation model including integrative motivation, linguistic self-confidence and appraisal of the classroom environment. This latter construct can be regarded as the first time that group dynamical processes have been included in Hungary (see Sect. 3.2.5 for further details).

3.2.2 Motivation and Autonomy Learner autonomy has long been acknowledged as an important part of the language learning processes (Benson, 2006; Little, 1999). Its role is even more pronounced in monolingual contexts, such as Hungary, where classroom instructions might not provide enough input for students to develop their foreign language skills (Kormos & Csizér, 2014). Yet, teachers often fail to make connections about how autonomous learning behavior might actually help classroom learning and turn learning into a more efficient process (Öveges & Csizér, 2018). This lack of connection between teacher- and student-initiated (i.e., autonomous) learning is even more apparent for the English language. Having a global status, even in a monolingual context, Hungarian teenagers spend hours on the internet engaging with the English language when playing games or listening to music, for example. For some reason though, the results of such implicit learning hardly find their way to classrooms, which are often highly focused on language exams (Csizér & Öveges, 2020; Csizér, Öveges, & Lajtai, 2020). Moreover, Hungarian studies regularly find that learner autonomy decreases proportionally with the number of years spent in compulsory education (Albert et al., 2018a, b; D. Molnár, 2014). Therefore, in a recent article, we have summarized autonomy-related studies in Hungary and the way they informed various local teaching programs targeted at increasing students’ autonomy during the learning process (Asztalos, Szénich, & Csizér, 2020). The main conclusion of this study was that although a wide range of programs aiming to develop students’ autonomy exist (e.g., Asztalos, 2016; Nádori, 2012; Prievara, 2015, 2019; Szénásiné Steiner, 2007; Szénich & Szokács, 2017), there is still little information about language

32

3 Research Pertaining to Student Motivation in Hungary

teachers’ knowledge and opinions about learner autonomy and about their approach to supporting autonomous language learning in and out of the classroom. As for the interrelationship of motivation and autonomy, one of the most important questions is concerned with the directional relationship between motivation and autonomy. While several studies investigated the general role of autonomy in learning and, specifically its contribution to foreign language learning in Hungary, only a limited number of investigations have dealt with the relationship between autonomy and motivation. Among these, some hypothesized that motivation was a prerequisite to autonomous learning behavior (Kormos & Csizér, 2014) with self-regulatory strategy use playing intermediating role between motivation and autonomy. Other investigations settle for correlational relations (Csizér, Albert, & Piniel, in preparation) and showed that both autonomous learning and autonomous use of technology correlated with motivated learning behavior, that is, students’ invested effort into language learning. A more situated study is that of Csizér and Tankó (2017), which looks at the role of English majors’ autonomous learning behavior in academic writing and concluded that even proficient users of English might lack the knowledge and resources to autonomous learning behavior. The main difficulty in researching the relationships between aspects of L2 motivation and autonomy is that circular relationship between the constructs should be tested, which is notoriously difficult in statistics. Based on Kormos and Csizér (2014) in particular, we can assume that it is not only motivation that affects students’ autonomous learning but rather autonomous learning as well as autonomous use of technology that impact motivational variables and students’ intended effort invested in language learning. This circular relationship can further be modified by including the roles and influences of the language teacher in promoting motivation and autonomy in concert.

3.2.3 Motivation and Emotions Emotions seen as individual difference variables shaping foreign language learning have only recently found their way into applied linguistics research. Similarly to international studies, the first emotion investigated in detail in Hungary was foreign language learning anxiety (see Piniel, 2006, 2010; for its relation to L2 motivation see Piniel & Csizér, 2013, 2015; Tóth, 2010). Following this, based on the pioneering work of Ágnes Albert and Katalin Piniel, a comprehensive number of emotions have been operationalized and measured based on the experiences of students studying in higher education. In one of their first studies (Piniel & Albert, 2018), they used qualitative methods to map the type of emotions advanced learners of English were experiencing in the four main skills (reading, writing, speaking and listening). By juxtaposing emerging themes from students’ one-paragraph essays to Pekrun’s (2014) framework of academically relevant emotions including achievement (enjoyment, hope, pride), epistemic (surprise, curiosity, confusion), social (love, sympathy, anger) emotions as well as emotions related to various topics, they concluded that

3.2 Motivation and Related Individual Difference Variables

33

different emotions related to different skills in learning, which showed the intricate and complex relationships of emotions in language learning. Subsequently, a large-scale investigation (Albert et al., 2018a, b) continued to map the role of emotions for secondary and primary school students and a quantitative questionnaire was developed, based on the earlier qualitative results cited above. Results concluded that although the majority of students reported positive emotions pertaining to classroom learning, around 20% were said to experience language use anxiety in the classroom. The reported level of anxiety did not seem to decrease over the years spent learning foreign languages at school, signaling that the sources of anxiety remained constant as proficiency levels increased. In addition, feelings of autonomy decreased during the years spent in compulsory education while selfreported boredom and apathy increased. As this point, it is unclear what role possible antecedent variables might play in contributing to such negative trends and the role of motivational variables is unclear in these negative processes. In terms of the emotions and its relations to L2 motivation, taking Dörnyei’s (2005, 2009b) L2 Motivational Self System theory and comparing its components to a number of positive and negative emotions, it was found that L2 learning experience related to the highest number of emotions. Both Motivated Learning Behavior and Ideal L2 self strongly related to three positive emotions: hope, pride and enjoyment, however, ought-to L2 self showed no relations to any of the emotions (Csizér & Albert, 2019; for more details see Csizér, Albert & Piniel, in preparation). These results come from two small scale studies from the capital city of Hungary, which means that they might not be generalizable across various contexts. Nevertheless, an important conclusion can still be drawn; different motivational dispositions might relate to different emotions; therefore, it is important to investigate a number of emotions and a number of motivational variables in order to arrive at conclusive results.

3.2.4 Motivation and Cognitive Factors Although the relationship between motivation and cognition is not a very popular topic in the field of L2 motivation, there are some Hungarian studies worth citing here. First, in a comparative study measuring the role of aptitude and motivation of 419 students in Year 6, Kiss and Nikolov (2005) found differing impacts on students’ language performance with aptitude explaining 22% of the variation in the data, while motivation comparably less: 8% variation. The results indicated the stronger role of cognitive factors than that of motivation, but they also showed that 70% of the outcome measure should be further explained. Regarding the interaction of motivation and cognitive skills, it can be hypothesized that certain cognitive skills, such as inductive reasoning, might interact with students’ motivation (Csapó & Nikolov, 2009; Nikolov & Józsa, 2006). In a large-scale study comparing students belonging to four different age groups in compulsory education, it was found that the strength of correlation concerning L2 proficiency and inductive reasoning not only changed

34

3 Research Pertaining to Student Motivation in Hungary

between Year 6 and Year 8 for students studying German and English, but also that the cognitive skills of English learners were more developed. This fact might open a chain of influences from better grades to higher levels of motivation that can all “influence the pace of development in the German language differently than in the case of English” (Csapó & Nikolov, 2009, p. 214). This finding coupled with the fact that socio-economic status of learners proved to be an important predictor variable in Hungarian public schools and “more educated parents’ children more typically have access to English than children of less educated parents” (Nikolov & Csapó, 2018, p. 56) further reiterates the need to investigate a large variety of individual variables in concert.

3.2.5 Group-Related Individual Difference Variables and Motivation One of the main characteristics of the classroom-context is that students are learning in groups. Despite this fact, very little attention has been paid to the ways grouprelated variables might affect students’ motivation and, consequently, their learning behavior and achievement. An early study cited above on L2 motivation in the Hungarian context (Clément et al., 1994), established that the perceived cohesiveness of the language group/class affected the motivational construct and correlated with students’ motivated behavior. Later, a full volume was dedicated to group-related processes and L2 motivation in the Hungarian context: Dynamic group, dynamic learning: The role of group dynamics in language learning (Csizér, Holló, & Károly, 2011). I have to admit that I regret having the volume published in Hungarian even though all the studies were conducted by professionals working in English-speaking contexts, and actually many of the studies in this volume were translations from English to Hungarian. As a result, the volume went largely unnoticed in the field of applied linguistics and language pedagogy outside of Hungary. As it is not possible to translate the full volume here, only a succinct summary will be presented (for another English summery see Medgyes & Nikolov, 2014). The empirical studies in the volume explored group dynamics in its broadest sense and investigated not only issues of group cohesiveness and cooperation but other potentially important concepts, such as experiences success in the group and dispositions toward group leaders. For example, Herendi and Fekete (2011) developed a short instrument to collect data on students’ attitudes toward group work. Group dynamics requires learners working in groups, so it is important to understand dispositions toward group work. As these attitudes might change over time, the study compared secondary school students and adult learners. Their results indicated that learners had a medium level of enthusiasm and found that younger learners preferred group work compared to adult learners. Adults, however, saw the usefulness of group work to a greater degree. The main issues contributing to students’ intended effort were as follows (p. 51):

3.2 Motivation and Related Individual Difference Variables

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.

35

Trying to remain active during group work. Easier to reach goals in group work than working individually. Always trying to speak English during group work. Contributing to the success of the group is motivating. Contributing more to group work than to individual work. Finding ways to work in groups.

Jánosházi and Csizér (2011) as well as Vukics (2011) investigated the interrelationships of intended effort (i.e., motivation) and various group-dynamical constructs. Their result indicated that it was not only group cohesion and cooperation that contributed to students’ intended effort in language learning but a number of other scales emerged as being important: the role of the group leader, a.k.a. the teacher, the feeling of success within the group, positive relationships toward the group members and the positive dispositions toward own group. (See Appendix B for the instrument used in Jánosházi and Csizér’s (2011) study translated into English.) The investigation of intervention efforts pertaining to group dynamical processes is another important line of research. Kivovics’s (2011) case study approach yielded very interesting results with two particular learning groups. She designed groupdynamically sensitive tasks, i.e., tasks where students had shown a high level of cooperation (Hadfield, 1992). She also employed a sociometric questionnaire to measure relationships among group members. As part of her methods, relations were illustrated by lines between students and the number of relations represent the cohesion of the group (for more details see: Mérei, 2004). Her results illustrated the point of group dynamics in language learning excellently: Fig. 3.1a contains the pre-intervention sociometric results for the control group and the intervention group, while Fig. 3.1b contains the post-intervention sociograms. If we compare Fig. 3.1a and b, we can see that the group assigned to the treatment showed a far larger numbers of interpersonal relationships following the intervention compared to the control group. Another strength of Kivovics’ (2011) study is measuring the amount of effort students reportedly invested into language learning by comparing the completed homework of two groups as well as their achievement in a final test of the English course. For both measures, the participants in the experimental group outperformed those of the control group. Similarly, Tóth (2011) managed to prove that it is worth having tasks aimed to strengthen group cohesion and cooperation even at a beginner level. She found that the learning of various language functions was more successful with groups who had had the opportunity to experience group dynamically relevant tasks. Having seen the results of these studies and considering the general popularity of L2 motivation research, it is somewhat uncanny that so few studies look into group dynamical processes. Such shortage cannot be explained by theoretical shortcomings, as group dynamics are traditionally seen as part of L2 motivation research field (e.g., Dörnyei, 1994, for initial theoretical considerations, and Sasaki, Kozaki, & Ross, 2017, for a more recent example) and its importance has been reinforced recently. See Dörnyei’s (2019b, p. 43) explanation for an example:

36

3 Research Pertaining to Student Motivation in Hungary (a)

First sociogram: control group

First sociogram: experimental group

(b)

Second sociogram: control group

Second sociogram: experimental group

Fig. 3.1 (a) The pre-intervention sociograms (Kivovics, 2011, p. 72) (b) The post-intervention sociograms (Kivovics, 2011, p. 73)

When a teacher faces a motivationally challenging classroom situation—such as, for example, general lethargy or disinterest—it may not be enough to cater for the individual learners’ motivational needs as part of the trouble-shooting efforts, because the learner group as a whole can have such a powerful influence over the members that it can override their personal preferences and commitment. Therefore, motivation needs to be tackled also at the group level, which explains the relevance of group dynamics to classroom motivation.

3.2 Motivation and Related Individual Difference Variables

37

Group dynamics as a highly relevant topic in L2 motivation research. It is further underlined by the fact that in the recent Palgrave Macmillan handbook of motivation for language learning (Lamb, Csizér, Henry, & Ryan, 2019) a whole chapter is dedicated to group dynamics. Fukada and his colleagues not only convincingly argued for the importance of group dynamics but also presented some hurdles to researching group dynamics. They did this by explaining how the perceptions of participants within their group should be considered as units of analysis. Further suggestions included conducting longitudinal studies employing advanced statistical analytical tools, such as structural equation modeling (Fukada, Falout, Fukuda, & Murphey, 2019, p. 313). Taking these arguments into account, it is not surprising to see the scarcity of empirical studies in the Hungarian as well as in the international contexts exploring group dynamical processes.

3.3 The Role of Milieu Rather than providing a summary of the role of milieu in L2 motivation studies, in this subchapter I have decided to detail one particular study that investigates the role of parents as well as teachers in shaping the components of Dörnyei’s (2005, 2009b) L2 Motivational Self System. This study was published in a Hungarian edited volume (Csizér & Galántai, 2012), therefore, it could not find its way into mainstream L2 motivation research, despite filling a critical research niche regarding contextual influence.

3.3.1 Background to the Study The study, initiated and executed by my former MA students Dóra Galántai, set out to measure how parental encouragement and attitudes as well as teachers’ efforts to motivate students might impact the components of Dörnyei’s L2 Motivational Self System (Dörnyei, 2005, 2009b). Figure 3.2 provides a schematic representation of the model tested in the study. The ultimate dependent scale was selected to be the students’ motivated learning behavior, that is, their intended effort and the intended amount of energy they were willing to invest in language learning (Kormos & Csizér, 2008). The components of L2 Motivational Self System were measured based on the definitions, presented in Chapter 2.4.2. In terms of the two antecedent scales, when measuring teacher roles, we relied on the studies that emphasized the impact teachers had on the students’ level of motivation (Cheng & Dörnyei, 2007; Dörnyei, 2007a; Dörnyei & Csizér, 1998). In order to measure the role of teachers, we used Dörnyei and Csizér’s (1998) study summarizing the views of 200 English teachers in Hungary on what they had thought the best ways to motivate students were. We did this because we had hypothesized that these motivational strategies would impact students’ learning experiences as well as their selves.

38

3 Research Pertaining to Student Motivation in Hungary

Fig. 3.2 A schematic representation of the model tested (based on Csizér & Galántai, 2012, p. 172)

In terms of parental influence, earlier research had shown its importance in the process of foreign language learning (Gardner, 1985; Gardner, Masgoret, & Tremblay, 1999). Moreover, Hungarian studies had proved that positive parental attitudes were decisive in the learning process not only for secondary but also for university students (Csizér & Kormos, 2009a; Kormos & Csizér, 2005). Based on the results, we assumed that parental influence would not only impact students’ ought-to L2 self but also their ideal L2 self, and to a certain extent, their learning experiences. Thus, the research questions this study intended to answer were as follows: (1) To what extent do the roles of teachers and parents impact the components of L2 Motivational Self System. (2) To what extent do the components of L2 Motivational Self System impact secondary school students’ motivated learning behavior?

3.3.2 Methods The study comprised 197 secondary school students from the west of Hungary. The students had 12 English teachers with one being a native speaker. As for their gender, 62% were girls and 38% boys. Their age distribution was as follows (with some missing data): 14 years old (8%), 15 years old (26%), 16 years old (32%), 17 years old (22%) and 18 years old (10%). The students started learning English in different grades: most characteristically, in Year 3 (24%) or in Year 9 (20%). According to self-reported perceptions about their proficiency, the majority of the students (61%) were of intermediate level. When collecting data at this school, we made sure that students from various types of classes were selected: 47% of them

3.3 The Role of Milieu

39

had three English lessons, while 43% had dual language syllabus. The rest of the students (10%) attended English classes more than three times a week. The student questionnaire contained 82 items adapted from (Dörnyei, 2001a; Dörnyei & Csizér, 1998; Kormos & Csizér, 2008). The language of the questionnaire was Hungarian; the participants’ mother tongue. Students had to answer each item using five-point scales, similar to the ones used in the Hungarian school system for grading purposes. The constructs used in the present data analysis were as follows: • Language learning experiences (4 items): the extent to which students liked learning English. Sample item: I enjoy the things we do in English classes. • Ideal L2 self (4 items): students’ views of themselves as successful L2 speakers. Sample item: I like to think of myself as someone who will be able to speak English. • Ought-to L2 Self (4 items): students’ perceptions of the various language learning related duties and obligations, imposed on them by their immediate environment. Sample item: If I fail to learn English, I’ll be letting other people down. • Motivated learning behavior (5 items): students’ efforts and persistence in learning English. Sample item: I am willing to work hard at learning English. • Parental influence (4 items): summarized parental encouragements and parents’ attitudes. Sample item: My parents support me in learning English. • Teachers’ influence (9 items): include strategies teachers use to motivate their students. Sample item: My teacher tailors the tasks to meet students’ interest. Data collection took place during regular class time. 200 questionnaires were distributed but three students decided not to participate in the anonymous study. It took approximately 25 min to complete the instrument. Data was analyzed with the help of structural equation modelling with AMOS. First, measurement models were defined and then the full model was tested as hypothesized in Fig. 3.2. The relationships in the tested model were defined by the literature review presented above as well as by earlier Hungarian studies (Csizér & Dörnyei, 2005; Csizér & Kormos, 2009a; Kormos & Csizér, 2008). The data-model fit was accessed by a number of different indexes (Browne & Cudeck, 1993; Byrne, 2001; Fan, Thompson, & Wang, 1999; Hu & Bentler, 1999).

3.3.3 Main Results The initially hypothesized structural model (Fig. 3.2) showed acceptable fit indices but some of the relationships proved to be non-significant, therefore, they had to be removed from the model (teacher’s influence  ideal L2 self; teacher’s influence  ought-to L2 self). As a result, the final model consists of seven significant relationships as illustrated in Fig. 3.3. This model describes adequately the influences parents and teachers have on secondary school students’ selves and experiences. For the fit indexes see Table 3.1.

40

3 Research Pertaining to Student Motivation in Hungary

Fig. 3.3 The final model (based on Csizér & Galántai, 2012, p. 175)

Table 3.1 Fit indices

Chi square /df

2.268

CFI

0.976

NFI

0.958

NNFI

0.810

RMSEA

0.080

PCFI

0.820

The most important results pertain to students’ milieu: we can see that parental influences are not only stronger than those of teachers but are working on multiple levels. Teachers’ efforts to motivate students indeed have a significant and positive impact on students’ language learning experiences but no particular effect on student selves. Parental influences affect all three components of the L2 Motivational Self System. Not surprisingly, the strongest effect is on students’ ought-to L2 selves as this is the component subsuming outside expectations that students think they should fulfill. As for students’ ideal L2 selves, the parental influence is still strong: students’ vision of themselves is helped to be established by their parents. The most thought-provoking result is the fact that students’ language learning experiences are shaped by parents and teachers to an equal degree. It seems that although language learning experiences are influenced by teachers’ efforts, these experiences are also socially constructed by parent-student interactions. The fact that teachers do not seem to influence students’ selves highlights the need to develop certain teaching strategies that can exert influence on students ideal and ought-to L2 selves since they are important antecedent variables for effort invested in language learning.

3.3 The Role of Milieu

41

3.3.4 Summary We should remember that this study had been completed before there was a surge of empirical investigations about the role of L2 Motivational Self System in learning processes, most notably, the role of teachers in enhancing students’ visions in language learning (Dörnyei, 2019b). Still, I think these results are important as they report indirect influences on students’ motivated learning behavior and an important contextual effect: that of the milieu. Further research studies are needed to uncover the role of parents and teachers in shaping self-related concepts in L2 motivation. Since this data collection, numerous studies have dealt with the way of shaping students’ selves operationalized within the L2 Motivational Self System (see Boo et al., 2015). Rather than providing general motivational strategies, I highlight some studies here that have been conducted specifically to demonstrate how students’ ideal L2 selves can be enhanced through intervention programs aimed at developing students’ visions about themselves as future language users (Csizér & Magid, 2014). For example, Magid (2014) designed scripted imagery as part of the language training course, Chan (2014) used imagery training strategies in teaching, and Mackay (2014) created a motivational training program based on proposals by Hadfield and Dörnyei (2013). In addition to these studies, Dörnyei (2014) outlined additional strategies that might have a positive impact on students’ self. Other studies also mapped the role of vision and imagery in L2 motivation using large-scale samples (e.g., You, Dörnyei, & Csizér, 2016). The most recent summary of the role of vision in L2 motivation is by Dörnyei (2020), who provides an interdisciplinary analysis of the notion and its application of second language acquisition.

3.4 Contact Experiences and Motivation 3.4.1 Intercultural Contact The role of intercultural contact in L2 motivation has been researched for several reasons in the Hungarian context and most of these reasons are valid in other settings as well. First, students learn foreign languages in order to communicate with the speakers of that language. Second, communication with speakers of other languages contributes to learning the language in turn. Third, learners’ experiences pertaining to communication might influence both their disposition toward the target language as well as their attitude to L2 speakers and L2 culture. The investigation of contact related issues in the L2 motivation field is rooted in the social-psychological study of intercultural contact. One of the most important subfields in the investigation of the contact-attitude relation within social psychology is that of the Contact Hypothesis (Allport, 1954; Pettigrew, 1998; Pettigrew & Tropp, 2006). The Contact Hypothesis argues that contact changes the attitudes and behavior of groups and individuals toward one another and these changes influence further contact between groups and

42

3 Research Pertaining to Student Motivation in Hungary

people. In the field of second language acquisition, contact first appeared in Clément’s (1980) model as a key constituent of L2 motivation. Clément and Kruidinier (1983) showed that frequent and pleasant contact experience resulted in increased linguistic self-confidence in L2 learners which, affected motivated learning behavior in a positive way. In another study, Clément, Noels, and Deneault (2001) concluded that more frequent positive contact experiences not only led to more confident language use but also influenced the identification profiles of language learners. The first study, conducted in Hungary, identified possible types of contact experiences among primary school students (aged 13/14). The results published in Kormos and Csizér (2007) described both direct and indirect contact experiences. Direct contact includes verbal interaction (either spoken or written) with native and nonnative speakers of the target language. Interaction with speakers can take place in the country of the target language, in the students’ native country, or in any other country where the inhabitants speak the target language as a second language or a lingua franca. In the course of indirect contact, students only see speakers of the target language but do not talk to them. Alternatively, students are told about the people and culture of the L2 by an “influential other” (e.g., parents, teachers, and siblings). Indirect contact also involved encounters with L2 cultural artifacts through various media (TV, internet, books, movies, magazines, and newspapers) (Clément & Kruidener, 1983). A follow-up study by Toptsi (2018) investigated intercultural contact experiences in the digital age and juxtaposed a previously used cultural interest scale (Dörnyei et al., 2006) with digital media use. The main items are compared in Table 3.2. The geographical position of Hungary posits interesting questions regarding contact with English and German speakers. This is because English as a global Table 3.2 Items measuring cultural interest and the use of digital media (based on Toptsi, 2018) Cultural interest

Digital media

I often listen to the music of English-speaking countries

I often play video games in English

I often read English magazines or newspapers published in English

I often use online video sharing platforms (such as YouTube) to view English content

I would like to know more about the culture and I often use online discussion platforms (such art of English-speaking countries as Reddit) to view English content I often watch TV programs or movies made in English-speaking countries

I often use microblogging platforms (such as Tumblr) to view English content

I often read books published in English

I often use social media networks (such as Facebook) to view English content I often listen to English language podcasts. I often read, watch, or listen to English news or articles on the internet

3.4 Contact Experiences and Motivation

43

language is spoken and used all over the world, while German is a regionally important language in Hungary due to the vicinity and economic impact of Germanspeaking counties. In what follows, I will compare students’ contact experiences with regard to English and German. In terms of the descriptive analysis of intercultural contact, there are a few interesting results to report (Csizér & Kormos, 2008a, b, 2009a; for the questionnaire employed in this study see Appendix C). Table 3.3 shows both learners of English and German score higher on the perceived importance of contact scale (mean values of 3.24 and 3.15, respectively) than on any other contact-related scales. The results of the scales measuring different types of indirect contact all show mean values lower than average (expressed by value 3 in the mid-point of the scale). Based on these results, it can be concluded that on the surface, students rarely experience direct contact, since the mean values of both direct spoken and written contact are lower than 2, not entirely unexpected in a foreign language environment. In other words, although students acknowledge the fact that intercultural contact plays some importance for success in language learning, the actual contact experiences they have at school is rare in the primarily monolingual Hungarian society. Moreover, the data suggest that indirect contact via the internet and other media is not frequent among the investigated group of teenagers, although this may have changed markedly in recent years. Regarding the differences amongst students of English and German in terms of inter-cultural contact, it can be observed that of the five scales, two show significantly different results: students of English have a higher level of direct written and media contact than those who study German. It seems that tourism does not create many contact opportunities for the majority of students in this country; rather, it is family resources and relations as well as school visits that play an important role in helping students experience intercultural contact. However, when assessed at a national level, neither family nor school resources provide sufficient opportunities for students to accumulate contact experiences. In conclusion, when direct and indirect levels of contact are measured using a national sample in Hungary involving a relatively young population, results indicate that despite having few intercultural contacts, students attach much importance to contact experiences. Table 3.3 The comparison of English- and German-related contact experiences (based on Csizér & Pohl, 2017) English (n = 1025)

German (n = 660)

M

St. dev.

M

St. dev.

T-value

Direct spoken contact

1.95

.79

1.92

.72

.92

Direct written contact

1.65

.86

1.45

.69

4.99*

Indirect contact

2.84

.79

2.76

.82

1.88

Cultural interest

2.47

.80

2.26

.72

5.43*

Perceived importance of contact

3.24

.86

3.15

.87

1.94

*significant at 0.05 level

44

3 Research Pertaining to Student Motivation in Hungary

3.4.2 The Impact of Intercultural Contact on L2 Motivation Several studies investigated the ways in which intercultural contact affects the amount of effort students were willing to invest in foreign language learning (motivated learning behavior) for German and English (Csizér & Kormos, 2008a, b, 2009b). Although the general level of contact experiences was rather low, some significant results were found, including differences between the two languages. The model of German shows that motivated learning behavior is directly affected by three latent variables: attitudes, perceived importance of contact and direct spoken contact. The link between direct contact and motivated behavior, however, is in contrast with our previous results about the role of direct contact for learners of English. The model of English indicated that direct spoken contact only affected foreign media usage and influenced attitudes indirectly (Csizér & Kormos, 2009b) and indicated no relationship between direct spoken contact and motivated learning behavior. The differences between the two languages might be due to the differing international status of English and German. As English is an international language, its attitudinal impact is mainly exerted by indirect means and it happens primarily through the media. German, on the other hand, does not have the same international status as English, but it bears regional relevance to Hungary for two reasons. First, the number of German-speaking tourists outnumbers visitors from other countries, and second, Austria is a neighboring German-speaking country with opportunities for work and holiday. Therefore, direct contact opportunities might play a more important role in influencing students’ language learning behavior for German than for English learners. Further differences in the two languages include having had to eliminate German media usage by Hungarian primary school students from the model because no latent variables could be linked to German media use in this context.

3.4.3 A New Direction in Contact and L2 Motivation Research: Study Abroad Investigations In terms of the contact experiences and L2 motivation research in the European context, study abroad schemes need to be considered. I have participated in investigations that explore the role of contact experiences of study abroad students, as part of my involvement in the European Cooperation in Science and Technology project (led by Martin Howard and Carmen Perez). Study abroad schemes, prevalent in the European Union, create excellent opportunities to investigate the role of contact from various perspectives (see, Howard, 2020; Mitchell & Tyne, in press). One particular study was initiated by two of my former MA students: Vanda Szatzker and Kitti Erd˝o-Bonyár. They validated a questionnaire measuring self-regulatory strategy use (i.e., what practical techniques participants are willing to use in order to take responsibility for their own learning) in a study abroad program (Csizér, Pawlak, Szatzker, & Erd˝o-Bonyár, in press). The measures of self-regulation were linked

3.4 Contact Experiences and Motivation

45

to both students’ motivated learning behavior during their study abroad program and their perceived level of self-efficacy. Although not conducted in a Hungarian setting, Pawlak, Csizér and Soto (2020; see also Pawlak & Csizér, in press) proved the existence of positive relationships between students’ level of intended effort in study abroad programs and their self-regulatory strategy use. The results of these studies show that self-regulatory strategy use is indeed important at various stages when studying abroad. These include the successful use of self-regulatory strategies employed by students, for example, collecting information about the city, the university and the courses offered prior to going abroad, and seeking communication opportunities as well as improving academic language proficiency once they arrive. In addition, self-regulatory strategy use impacts motivated learning behavior, that is, the amount of effort invested in learning during studying abroad. Finally, another critical variable contributing to strategy use and motivation is thought to be students’ self-efficacy beliefs, i.e., their beliefs in being able to complete the necessary tasks or ask for help during the study abroad program.

3.5 Demotivation A pivotal issue in classroom learning concerns the empirical investigation of students’ demotivation, that is, students failing to retain their enthusiasm during the learning process. Demotivation can be defined as a process whereby initially motivated students lose their willingness to invest energy into language learning. It is different from amotivation in self-determination theory (e.g., Noels, 2001a; Noels et al., 2019), which implies a complete lack of motivation and unwillingness to engage in learning. International research in the 1990s (e.g., Chambers, 1993; Oxford, 1998) indicated that both internal and external factors can contribute to students’ diminishing levels of their motivation. Internal factors constitute student-related variables which include lack of self-confidence, lack of the perceived importance attached to language learning as well as conflict with teachers. External factors including a number of teacher-related issues also emerged in these studies, for example: teaching methods and learning tasks; both clearly associated with classroom learning. These results were corroborated by a Hungarian study, in which Dörnyei (1998b) identified the impact of teachers as the most important demotivating factor. Similarly, Nikolov (2001) found that classroom-related processes related to teachers, played an important role in shaping students’ dispositions, motivation and achievement. This negative perspective was further illustrated by the titles of Hungarian articles from the early 2000s, employing qualitative methods: “I do not like learning English because…” (Kormos & Lukóczky, 2004) and “I have been learning for many years without getting anywhere” (Nikolov & Nagy, 2003). Nikolov and Nagy (2003) found that classroom-related processes, more specifically teachers, played an important role in shaping students’ dispositions, motivation and achievement (see also Nikolov, 2001). In their case study, Kormos and Lukóczky (2004) concluded that negative attitudes toward the English language and (American) culture, anxiety and/or lack

46

3 Research Pertaining to Student Motivation in Hungary

of self-confidence as well as demotivating teachers were the major culprits causing students’ demotivation. More recent studies, carried out by two of my MA students, indicated further issues related to demotivation. Using quantitative research methods, Garai (2016) investigated the notion of remotivation, that is, “getting [students’] motivation online again” (Ushioda, 1998, p. 86). Her study was not the first to investigate remotivation as such (see, e.g., Falout, 2012; Trang & Baldauf, 2007) but it was the first one in the Hungarian context. Garai’s (2016) final constructs are presented in Table 3.4. According to her findings, which was based on a sample of secondary school students, it was the negative attitudes toward group members that were the major sources of demotivation (Garai, 2016). Such results point toward the importance of group dynamical processes in foreign language learning (see Sect. 3.2.5). School policies of streaming should also be considered here (see Chapter 1). For example, in secondary schools, foreign language groups are often created by filling them with students from different classes in the same year. In such cases, it becomes even more paramount for teachers to ensure healthy dynamics in their groups. Another key responsibility for the teacher is to have a selection of relevant materials, which came as the second most important scale in Garai’s study. As classroom learning in Hungary is highly course book driven whose level sometimes mismatches students’ Table 3.4 The final constructs with examples from the item pool (Garai, 2016, p. 19) Construct

Examples

1. The teacher

Personality, pronunciation, enthusiasm, teaching method

2. Inadequate school facilities

Level of the class, preparing not just for tests, satisfaction with classes

3. Group members

Attitude of group members, competition with peers

4. Materials used

Course book, topics, homework, multimedia devices

5. Negative attitude toward L2

Attitude toward L2 grammar, vocabulary, sound of L2

6. Negative attitude toward L2 community Attitude toward travelling to L2 countries 7. Compulsory nature of L2

Learning the L2 because it is compulsory, whether having a clear aim of learning

8. Interference of another foreign language Success in another language, effect of another L2 grammar or vocabulary 9. Reduced self-confidence

Bad grades, bad performance during classes

10. Way of learning

Studying on your own, having your own way of memorizing words

11. Internal remotives

Wish to understand natives, realizing that L2 knowledge is indispensable

12. External remotives

Praise from the teacher, attending a language school

3.5 Demotivation

47

Table 3.5 Emerging themes in Dér’s (2018) study (p. 24) (1) The role of the English teacher: the teachers’ personalities, attitudes, competence and their teaching method. (2) The peer group: number of the students in a group, attitudes of the group members toward each other and streaming. (3) Lack of time and priority: the participants believed that they had no time to study English, because they prioritized other activities in their free time. (4) Being successful or unsuccessful in English learning: having good or bad grades, failed, or passed at the intermediate language exam and their ability to make themselves understood in class or outside of the classroom in English. (5) Language certificate: lack of language certificate, having a language certificate and the compulsory nature of having a language certificate in higher education, language exam. (6) Dispositions toward the foreign language: difficulties with English grammar.

perceived proficiency levels (Öveges, 2018; Öveges & Csizér, 2018), it is not difficult to imagine that secondary school students have negative attitudes toward course books, especially compared to some online content they see in on the internet. Building on the results of Jung (2011), Garai (2016) differentiated between internal and external remotives and measured learners’ dispositions toward these two scales. It might not be surprising to see that internal remotives proved to be more useful for students to overcome demotivation. In terms of remotivation, what helped students overcome their demotivation was not only the love of and the desire to use the language but also self-efficacy, i.e., the beliefs they held about being able to complete tasks related to language learning. Given that questionnaire studies are limited in aspects pertaining to the investigation of personal views, another MA student of mine, Kinga Dér, conducted a follow-up interview study to Garai’s (2016) investigation. The results of the two studies cannot be compared directly as Dér’s (2018) investigation included university rather than secondary school language learners. The emerging themes in Dér’s study are still revealing and are summarized in Table 3.5. Although methodological and sample-related differences do not warrant direct comparison of the studies, it can be concluded that a number of classroom specific issues present potential causes of demotivation and the central role the teacher might play in these negative processes cannot be denied. Another study (Illés & Csizér, 2018), whose focus was not demotivation as such, showed some revealing results from the point of view of teachers. In this large-scale, representative study, teachers (N = 1118) had to answer several open-ended questions about perceived problems related to classroom teaching. Several teachers experienced lack of motivation in students and reported that students would only work if they were tested regularly. These results were corroborated in another study investigating the opinions of heads of schools (Tartsayné Németh, Tiboldi, & Katona, 2018), who expressed very similar views, and added that in terms improving language proficiency, potentially demotivating issues included having large groups with heterogeneous students. It seems that classroom differentiation could be yet another concept to investigate as it may then

48

3 Research Pertaining to Student Motivation in Hungary

become clearer how it contributes to motivation/demotivation/remotivation issues. In addition, the views of teachers need to be explored as well in order to see how they view demotivational processes and their roles in counteracting these negative trends.

3.6 Special Educational Needs Learners In terms of special needs students, two groups were investigated in Hungary in depth: dyslexic language learners and Deaf individuals. These studies were spearheaded by Judit Kormos (dyslexic learners) and Edit Kontra (Deaf learners). As most of the results of these investigations have been published internationally, what follows here is a short summary of the most revealing motivational characteristics of these learners.

3.6.1 Dyslexic Language Learners The first large-scale study, dealing with dyslexic learners in primary education in Hungary, employed a comparative research design. Both learners of English and German were included in the sample, and the two groups were further broken down into dyslexic and non-dyslexic language learners in order to provide a systematic comparison on the motivation profiles of these learner groups. Table 3.6 summarizes the results, based on Csizér (2010), by including descriptive statistics as well as information on the data yielded from two-way analyses of variance. Interestingly, in terms of the attitude-related results, the differences found were not between dyslexic and non-dyslexic learners but between learners of English and German. The study found that English learners scored higher on the language learning attitudes scale than German learners did, regardless whether they were dyslexic or not. The results reinforce the language preference rank-orders in the Hungarian context as detailed in Chapter 1 and Sect. 3.1. In addition, when language learning experiences were explored, all student groups showed relatively low results. Not surprisingly, the perceived importance of English outscored that of German in spite of German being a regionally important language and possibly an easier language to learn for dyslexic learners due to its shallow orthography (Kormos & Csizér, 2010). Dyslexic learners reported a higher amount of language learning difficulties than non-dyslexic learners irrespectively of the language studied. This indicates that orthographical differences between English and German might be a real issue, however, motivational preferences should still be taken into account when deciding what language dyslexic learners should learn. Following the completion of the nation-wide study on dyslexic language learners, it became vital for the research results to be turned into practical support for these learners. Hence, a group of researchers set out to create online resources to help both self-study and teacher-led activities for the learning of English and German.

3.6 Special Educational Needs Learners

49

Table 3.6 Some of the motivational dispositions of dyslexic and non-dyslexic learners pertaining to English and German Scales

Sub-samplea

M

St. dev.

F: dyslexia

F: language

F: interaction

Language learning

Dis. Eng.

3.32

1.05

0.01

6.84*

0.39

attitudes

Dis. Ger.

3.15

1.10

Non-d. Eng.

3.36

96

Non-d. Ger.

3.10

1.03

Language learning

Dis. Eng.

3.26

90

3.35

2.47

0.66

experiences

Dis. Ger.

3.45

86

Non-d. Eng.

3.18

93

Non-d. Ger.

3.24

1.01

Dispositions toward

Dis. Eng.

4.20

76

9.22*

124.99**

0.46

English/German

Dis. Ger.

3.49

94

language as global/

Non-d. Eng.

4.34

64

contextually important language

Non-d. Ger.

3.71

81

Language learning

Dis. Eng.

2.91

97

73.17**

0.70

0.30

difficulties

Dis. Ger.

2.89

94

Non-d. Eng.

3.53

81

Non-d. Ger.

3.44

80

Eng = Dyslexic learners of English; Dis. Ger. = Dyslexic learners of German; Non-d. Eng. = Non-dyslexic learners of English; Non-d. Ger. = Non-dyslexic learners of German *p < 0.001, **p < 0.0001 a Dis.

A particularly useful example is an award-winning international project in which a number of Hungarian researchers participated http://dystefl2.uni.lodz.pl/. A followup study, funded by the European Union, provides further resources for the inclusive education of dyslexic language learners: http://engage.uni-miskolc.hu/.

3.6.2 Deaf Language Learners There are a few studies investigating one of the largest language minority students in Hungary: Deaf language learners. Edit Kontra’s pathbreaking efforts over the years led to a series of research projects, systematically mapping foreign language learning experiences of Deaf learners in Hungary (for a recent summary see Kontra,

50

3 Research Pertaining to Student Motivation in Hungary

2019). One of the first studies involved adult Deaf participants and their dispositions toward foreign language learning, in general. In 2009, following the ratification of the Hungarian sign language (HSL) as a natural language of the Deaf community, one of the first research efforts was to explore how much Deaf participants wished to use sign language and how useful they thought it was when learning other languages. As expected, results showed that sign language was indeed considered to be the most natural means of communication for the Deaf, and that it was the preferred language for foreign language learning rather than Hungarian. Deaf respondents also agreed that the use of HSL was essential for the enhancement of information transfer, effectiveness and student-teacher rapport in education, and that HSL should be taught to future teachers of the Deaf (Kontráné Hegybíró, Csizér, & Sáfár, 2008). Deaf learners’ level of motivation to learn English did not prove to be particularly high in spite of them being aware of the importance of English in today’s world as well as of the pragmatic value of the English language (Csizér, Kontráné Hegybíró, & Sáfár, 2008). These findings were complemented by results measuring the foreign language learning experiences of Deaf adults. It was disheartening so see that for more than 30% of the participants, opportunities for foreign language learning were not provided during their compulsory education. Such a figure seriously questions their rights to equal opportunities in education. In addition, it seemed that just having the opportunity to learn a foreign language was enough to increase levels of motivation (Kontráné Hegybíró, Csizér, & Sáfár, 2009). The study outlined above involved Deaf adults regardless whether they were active language learners at the time of the data collection. Therefore, it was important to carry out a series of follow-up investigations on Deaf students in compulsory education and their foreign language learning characteristics. Hence, the next largescale study was concerned with school children; their experiences and motivation in learning foreign languages in Hungary. In this complex research program, a mixedmethods research strategy was employed to investigate Deaf students’ (aged 14–19) foreign language learning dispositions using a validated questionnaire and a piloted interview guide. In addition, we conducted interviews with teachers of Deaf students and heads of schools and we also observed some lessons. Data was collected from each of the seven schools in Hungary catering for Deaf students. Both the design and the volume of data collected warranted international publication, which meant that the main results of the study were published in English. The publications are as follows: Csizér, Kontra, and Piniel (2015), Kontra, Csizér, and Piniel (2014), and Piniel, Kontra, and Csizér (2016). Some of the main results of this project are as follows (Csizér, Piniel, & Kontráné Hegybíró, 2015; Kontra, Piniel, & Csizér, 2017; Kontráné Hegybíró, Csizér, & Piniel, 2013; Kontráné Hegybíró, Piniel, & Csizér, 2014): 1. Deaf learners’ motivated learning behavior is largely shaped by positive language learning experiences, realistic language learning beliefs and cognitive learning strategies applied in a successful way. 2. Deaf learners lack strong ideal L2 selves, that is, they cannot see themselves as proficient users of English. In addition, even the most motivated Deaf foreign

3.6 Special Educational Needs Learners

51

language learners might lack support from their immediate milieu and have weak self-efficacy beliefs. These results indicate that neither the students nor people around them seem to be convinced that foreign language knowledge was within reach. 3. In bilingual education (i.e., learning English through Hungarian sign language) the interrelationships among the motivational scales were significantly higher than in contexts where auditive-verbal teaching prevailed. 4. Most teachers of Deaf learners cannot use Hungarian Sign Language, which makes the learning process increasingly difficult for Deaf learners as they might have to juggle multiple foreign languages in education. 5. Based on the information collected from the heads of the special schools, it has become clear that with an increasing number of Deaf learners completing their compulsory education in integration, the special schools established for Deaf learners were catering for a large number of different special needs students, which made teaching Deaf learners even more difficult in this context. At the time of writing this monograph, the most recent study on Deaf learners included students in higher education. In this project, equal opportunities in higher education including access to English and study abroad opportunities in the European Union were investigated. The project called Language Skills of Deaf Students for EU Mobility was funded by the European Union and executed by four countries: the Czech Republic, Hungary, Austria and the UK. The main aims of the project were organized around four distinctive outputs. First, a survey and a case study were conducted on Deaf students studying in higher education in the Central European region. Second, learning from the difficulties Deaf people face in education, materials for EFL teachers of Deaf learners, including methodological recommendations, teaching tips and lesson plans, were designed, subsequently piloted within the framework of summer schools and made available online (https://www.teires ias.muni.cz/en/science-research-and-development/projects/langskills). Finally, two online courses were developed, piloted and made available for Deaf students: one of written English and another of British sign language. As for the findings pertaining to the motivation of Deaf learners in higher education, our results were published in The Modern Language Journal (Csizér & Kontra, 2020). It was disheartening to see that even though we had networked and used all our connections in the three Central European countries, we were only able to recruit 54 participants from higher education for our survey. This suggests that only a small minority of Deaf learners can actually proceed to higher education. Data shows that it is not due to the lack of motivation on the students’ part, but rather to the difficulties they encounter during compulsory education. Some of these difficulties include not having a sound L1, having a high turnover of teaching staff, lack of continuity in foreign language teaching and teachers not using sign language, which prevent students from entering higher education (Csizér & Kontra, 2020).

52

3 Research Pertaining to Student Motivation in Hungary

3.7 Longitudinal Studies of L2 Motivation in Hungary Nikolov’s (1999) study is unparalleled in the field: she carried out a long-term ethnographic study investigating the motivational patterns of three groups of children (aged 6–14) in Pécs between 1977–1995. Based on the results, obtained by students answering open-ended questions, she concluded that the children were mainly motivated by factors associated with the classroom situation (i.e., positive attitudes toward the learning context and the teacher as well as intrinsically motivating activities, tasks, and materials). Traces of instrumental motivation emerged among older children; however, no integrative motives were detected. Another example of a longitudinal study conducted by Heitzmann (2008), followed one group of learners for three consecutive years in Hungary. The study employed a variety of data collection instruments and aimed to map the changes in students’ L2 motivation. The findings covered three broad topics: (1) The impact of the teacher’s motivating efforts on students: how students’ selves had changed over the school year, what types of attributional processes had been detected, and in what ways feelings of success had contributed to students’ motivation. (2) The impact of teaching materials on students’ motivation: what guidelines might be used by the teacher to select motivating materials taking into student expectations into account. The ways in which materials and methods of working interacted as well as how much cooperation among students within the learning group contributed to students’ motivation were also explored. (3) Classroom atmosphere as a contributing factor in students’ motivation. Meeting students’ expectations in order to reach their goals seemed important. A source of conflict identified came from the different interpretations of what constituted learning and knowledge by students and their teacher, indicating issues related to explicit and implicit learning and how the modes of learning could be bridged. The final study I would like to cite had a much shorter timeframe. It investigated the ebbs and flows of motivation of English major university students during the course of one seminar (Piniel & Csizér, 2015). The results of this study are described in Chapter 2.5, but I must emphasize that this study used quantitative methods to investigate changes in L2 motivational processes as measured by the various components of Dörnyei’s L2 Motivational Self System. The results were analyzed by longitudinal clustering (i.e., we investigated the extent students’ profiles had changed over time) as well as by latent growth curve modelling (Byrne & Crombie, 2003). It was revealing to see how the components of L2 motivation showed different trajectories: the components most susceptible to change were learning experience and the ought-to L2 self, while participants’ ideal L2 self and motivated learning behavior remained fairly stable. In other words, these students seemed to have a strong, internalized vision of themselves as future users of English, but this vision did not entirely shield them from outside expectations and negative learning experiences. The difficulty in longitudinal studies arises from possible problems and pitfalls during data collection and analysis rather than from aspects of design. Due to the increasingly and rightly strict European data protection regulations, it has become

3.7 Longitudinal Studies of L2 Motivation in Hungary

53

more difficult to gain entries to classroom context research sites. Such difficulties are only exacerbated by the fact that data collection cannot be fully anonymous in longitudinal studies: in order to match data from the various phases of data collections, participants need to be identified by name or a specially designed code, which may lead to reluctance to participate. This may be the reason why the studies mentioned before were carried out by teacher-researchers. In Hungary, having English teachers, who would execute such complex research projects, are, unfortunately, more of an exception than a rule, and this might be the case for other contexts as well. Employing quantitative data poses additional sets of difficulties: it is not easy to analyze longitudinal data with multivariate statistical tools. Still, we cannot ignore the fact that L2 motivation indeed changes over time, and both trait and state characteristics need to be considered if we want to get a full picture of students’ L2 motivational processes (Csizér & Albert, in press).

3.8 Age-Related Differences Age specific studies should be considered an important subfield in L2 motivation, as the learning processes can vary across age (Pfenninger & Singleton, 2017). One way to investigate age as a variable is to develop a sample containing learners of a specific age. An excellent example for this is the L2 motivational studies of young learners (e.g., Nikolov, 1999) cited above. In fact, the study of young learners (usually defined as learners younger than 14/15 years old) should be considered as a separate subfield in L2 motivation (Mihaljevi´c Djigunovi´c & Nikolov, 2019): young learners’ “motivation is a specific phenomenon in itself due to its sources and dimensions, as well as to the complex and dynamic interactions it enters into with other language learning variables” (p. 516). The importance of young learners’ motivation is not only emphasized in the long-term motivational effect of early experiences in classroom learning (e.g., Nikolov, 2001, in the Hungarian context) but by motivation’s closely-knit relation to the classroom context which is “shaped by how intrinsically motivating classroom activities are, and what feedback their teachers and peers offer them” (p. 516). Based on the empirical studies as well as on theoretical considerations, Mihaljevi´c Djigunovi´c and Nikolov (2019) proposed a theoretical framework to research L2 motivation for young learners. This framework illustrates the changing nature of the impact of the milieu (family), the school context and the teachers. As the learner matures, parental and teacher influences show a declining tendency, but these processes are replaced by increasingly important peer-influences such as rolemodelling, competition and cooperation. The main advantages of this framework include its focus on classroom motivation and motivational processes which are seen as interacting with one another in dynamic ways, while motivation is conceptualized as a bi-directional process between teachers and students. In addition, the individual learner is considered as part of the learning group, reflecting the reality of the classroom context.

54

3 Research Pertaining to Student Motivation in Hungary

Another age-related research niche found when investigating L2 motivation is about the motivational profiles of mature language learners. Emese Schiller (submitted for publication) conducted a questionnaire study with mature learners of English. Her study involved 30 participants between the ages of 50 and 75. The theoretical background of her study was aided by the Gardnerian motivation theory and the Attitude/Motivation Test Battery was used in her investigation (Gardner, 1985; 2004; Gardner & Tremblay, 1995), marking one of the first occasions that this questionnaire was used in Hungary. One of the marked differences in the Hungarian results compared to other contexts was the negative influence of integrative motivation (cf. Gardner, 2019): Its impact was indirectly mediated through language learning-related attitudes on motivational intensity. As this study employed a small sample, care should be taken when generalizing and drawing conclusions. These results indicated that more mature learners might have a desire to learn a foreign language without wanting to integrate into or identify with the community. Age-related differences can also be studied within a single context. Kormos and Csizér (2008) investigated three distinct groups of learners and found systematic differences between secondary school students, university students and adult language learners both in terms of the internal structure and level of motivation. Considering the differences among various motivational scales, we found that university students had the strongest ideal L2 selves. Our explanation referenced Carlson’s (1965) ideas about the changes in one’s self-images can change during adolescence, which suggests that the ideal L2 selves can undergo transformation. On the other hand, we argued that adults’ self-images might be relatively stable and the fact that they are learning a foreign language later in life, the L2 selves need to adjust to their already crystallized self-image and not the other way around. Moreover, university students are in a period of their lives when their self-images are still flexible (Carlson, 1965); therefore, the L2 self can still be integrated into their self-image. The differences found in the internal structure of L2 motivation indicated that the interest shown by secondary school students in cultural products of the English language were a stronger predictor of intended effort than it was for the other two groups, while international posture as an important predictive variable was only present in the two older age groups. Additionally and in line with Nikolov’s (1999) study cited above, it was found that classroom related experiences for younger learners were more defining than for the other groups of learners. Using two particular groups studying in compulsory education, namely, Year 7 learners (aged 12–13) and Year 11 learners (aged 16–17), Albert et al. (2018a, b) reported some characteristic differences in the decrease of L2 motivation from Year 7 to Year 11. Interestingly, the item showing the most significant drop was related to continuing one’s studies into secondary education (for Year 7 students) and into higher education (for Year 11 students). One explanation for this drop might be that many of the Year 11 students had already obtained their language exam certificates and they considered the task of learning foreign languages to be over. Exam-centeredness is a distinctive feature of the Hungarian education system (Öveges & Csizér, 2018) where equating foreign language knowledge to having a language certificate, possibly valid for life, can be counterproductive for both

3.8 Age-Related Differences

55

long-term engagement with foreign languages and language knowledge attrition in adults.

3.9 Summary Based on the above overview, it seems apparent that L2 student motivation has been approached from different angles and several variables related to L2 motivation have been mapped. Research-methodological issues have also been considered as varied strategies have been used to collect both cross-sectional and longitudinal data. Yet, L2 motivation as a classroom concept has received very little attention, possibly because empirical investigations of language learning experiences have just started to gain attention (Csizér & Kálmán, 2019a). There are no current data of classroom observation studies, and motivation has largely failed to be conceptualized as an interactional process. There are no studies including teacher-student or studentstudent interactions as sources of motivation. In addition, data collected from students was decontextualized to a certain extent as most of the data collections involved either self-reported questionnaires or interview studies. However, students’ output and the observation of students’ classroom behavior have not been tackled yet.

Chapter 4

Teacher Motivation in Hungary

L2 language learning motivation research has traditionally been fueled by a persistent interest shown toward language learners, as learning outcome and achievement is best researched from the point of view of students. In fact, as Dörnyei (2019a) argues L2 motivation researchers are motivated “in their interest in the personality/identity of the language learner” (p. 31, original emphasis). The notion of interest is well documented in a large number of publications detailing learners’ motivational characteristics and preferences in various research contexts from around the world (Dörnyei & Ushioda, 2011; Lamb, Csizér, Henry, & Ryan, 2019). As I have tried to show in Chapter 3, international trends clearly inspired Hungarian researchers involved in student-focused research conducted in Hungary. Yet, no amount of student-related research can replace the need to think about teacher motivational processes if classroom motivation is to be (re)considered from a relational perspective (Henry, Sundqvist, & Thorsen, 2019) or as an interactional process defined by effort and persistence to learn a foreign language, co-constructed by teachers and students alike. Teacher motivation should not only be considered as research looking at how teachers could motivate students but teachers’ motivational profiles should also be regarded. Although there are several studies dealing with teachers’ motivational strategies (Csizér, 2017), there seems to be a largely ignored area of research related to teacher motivation: their attitudes, dispositions and experiences are hardly ever mapped. Therefore, this chapter summarizes a recent study that I have conducted in Hungary on the motivational profiles of English teachers. The original research report was written in Hungarian (Csizér, 2020) and in this present chapter, I will provide a summary of the most important results as well as further analyses. The structure of the chapter follows that of a traditional research report. First, I will present a short theoretical background to L2 teacher motivation. Next, some of the insights from earlier studies on L2 teacher motivation will be offered highlighting results in the Hungarian context. Then, the most important methodological characteristics and results of my mixed-methods study will be detailed. In terms of the results,

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020 K. Csizér, Second Language Learning Motivation in a European Context: The Case of Hungary, Second Language Learning and Teaching, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-64462-8_4

57

58

4 Teacher Motivation in Hungary

the qualitative and quantitative findings will be presented and discussed separately. Future research directions will be summarized in Chapter 5.

4.1 Teacher Motivation: Definitions, Theoretical and Conceptual Frameworks Every scientific inquiry should start by providing definitions, therefore, before I provide a synthesis of relevant information on teacher motivation, definitional issues need to be clarified concerning L2 language teacher motivation. In my studies presented in Sects. 4.5 and 4.6, the profession of language teachers is seen in its broadest sense and includes teachers working in both the public and private sectors, and at all levels of education: in primary, secondary and higher education as well as in adult and corporate education. Teacher motivation is also extended to include preservice teachers, that is prospective teachers, because certain aspects of motivation, for example, choice motivation, is best investigated in that particular population (cf. Dörnyei & Ottó, 1998; Dörnyei & Ushioda, 2011). In my studies presented here, I focused on the motivation of English language teachers and decided to leave research on teachers of other languages for the future for two main reasons. The first reason is practical: I did not have the time and resources to include teachers of other than English language. Second, although English is not a compulsory foreign language in Hungarian schools, it is certainly the most often taught language followed by German (Öveges & Csizér, 2018). As most Hungarian studies center on students of English, I thought it would be reasonable to explore the motivation of English language teachers to establish a baseline and then to conduct further research on teachers teaching other languages as it was done in Szrogh and Csizér (in press). As a starting point for defining L2 teacher motivation, definitions describing motivation in general and student motivation related to foreign language learning in particular should be considered as detailed in Chapter 2. As motivation is seen as a complex construct, there is no single definition accepted by all researchers, although most would probably agree with Dörnyei and Ushioda’s (2011) broad conceptualization of motivation as choice, effort and persistence. Individual definitions might include further concepts as well, such as satisfaction (Gardner, 1985), or various dichotomies such as state vs. trait motivation which are concerned with the enduring nature of motivation (Brophy, 1987). Definitions might also extend to external or internal locus of motivation (Crookes & Schmidt, 1991), or researchers might emphasize the longitudinal nature of motivation for foreign language learning as it is an enduring process (Dörnyei, 1998a; Dörnyei & Ottó, 1998). This chapter defines teacher motivation as a complex construct incorporating four, possibly inter-related aspects: (1) How much effort foreign language teachers are willing to invest in their teaching work. (2) How much effort foreign language teachers are willing to invest in their professional development related work. (3) How much effort foreign language teachers are willing to invest in sustaining or

4.1 Teacher Motivation: Definitions, Theoretical and Conceptual Frameworks

59

enhancing their foreign language knowledge. (4) How much effort foreign language teachers are willing to invest in motivating their own students. Based on this definition, teacher motivation is seen as a notion which is complex by nature as it comprises a self-related dimension describing motivating oneself but another dimension as well, which indicates that teacher motivation should also acknowledge the role of motivating students. This definition is in line with previous definitions of student motivation (see Chapter 2) by making intended effort a central component (Dörnyei & Ushioda, 2011). This definition was developed for the purpose of the studies presented in this chapter, however, there are other possible ways of defining teacher motivation that might include further dimensions, especially if classroom observational or ethnographical data are employed to include aspects of choice motivation in the classroom. In terms of theoretical considerations, I do not know of any theories that specifically target L2 teachers’ motivational processes. Some theories which focus on student motivation acknowledge the role of teachers, and therefore, they may be used to conceptualize the importance of motivating students and its impact on teacher motivation. In addition, some of the student-related theories have been adapted to describe teacher motivation as well. A short summary will follow detailing the possible impact of teacher behavior on student motivation, and then the available literature on teacher motivation will be discussed. Empirical studies are presented separately in Sects. 4.5 and 4.6. As explained in Chapter 2, Gardner pioneering work on L2 motivation took a social- psychological perspective and investigated the roles of attitudes in foreign language learning (cognitive, affective and behavioral dispositions toward various entities), based on the theoretical assumptions that attitudes affected, among others, one’s behavior. Gardner’s (2019) contribution includes the Attitude Motivation Test Battery (AMTB) measuring attitudes toward the language community, the learning situation and the language itself. I have no knowledge of existing studies that have adapted the AMTB to be used for teachers although a construct of L2 teachers was included in this instrument (attitudes toward the L2 teacher). Nevertheless, it stands to reason that teachers’ attitudes to various aspects of teaching will influence their motivation in direct and indirect ways. Gardner’s theoretical work, summarized in his Socio-Educational Model of Second Language Learning, makes no reference to teachers or their roles in defining learning outcomes, context and individual differences (most recently: Gardner, 2019). Some more teacher-sensitive aspects of motivation emerged when cognitive and situated (i.e., classroom-related) processes of learner motivation were considered. In a somewhat contradictory fashion, teachers themselves were hardly ever investigated although attention was given to the teachers’ work. Three theories seem to stand out from of L2 motivation research as being especially revealing for teacher motivation (discussed in Chapter 2 in details): Crookes and Schmidt (1991), Dörnyei (1994) and Williams and Burden (1997). First, all three models intended to be inclusive in the sense that they tried to postulate all the possibly relevant aspects of L2 motivation irrespectively of empirical and measurement considerations and thus, teacher influences were referred to in different ways. Second, except for Dörnyei (1994),

60

4 Teacher Motivation in Hungary

the models not only included classroom-level characteristics of motivation but also some broader contextual influences, but without providing possible ways to establish bridges across the various micro- and macro-contexts. Third, the role of teachers in L2 motivation was implicated in all these theories. Both Crookes and Schmidt (1991) and Williams and Burden (1997) listed issues directly linked to teachers, such as, activities, feedback and needs analysis. Dörnyei (1994) was more specific and included teacher-specific motivational components in his model and pointed out the importance of direct socialization of motivation by modeling, task presentation as well as feedback, all of which cannot be done by an unmotivated teacher. These models can inform the conceptualization of any teacher-focused motivation research but there is a clear need to establish theories that describe the processes and characteristics of teacher motivation in a complex and classroom-relevant way.

4.2 Empirical Studies on L2 Teachers’ Motivation Even though in the 1980s, Brophy and Good (1986) pointed out that “the myth that teachers do not make a difference in student learning has been refuted” (p. 370), and Dörnyei and Ushioda (2011) touched upon the ways teachers’ motivation might impact students’ motivation, there are surprisingly few empirical studies concentrating on L2 teachers’ motivation. In this chapter, I will set out to summarize the existing literature in order to reveal the research gap that motivated my study. First, identity-related studies are discussed and then, I will move on to investigations that have used the modular view of individual difference research, i.e., treating teacher motivation as a distinct individual difference variable. Finally, I will also touch upon teacher-related studies inspired by Dörnyei’s (2005, 2009b) L2 Motivational Self System, as well as on the relevant aspects of mindset theory (Dweck, 1999, 2006). When addressing language teachers’ motivation from the identity point of view, De Costa and Norton (2017) point out that the identity of L2 teachers is a multidimensional construct relating to their teaching work but also to the on-going learning dimension of their work. If we take into account Gardner’s (1985) long accepted argument about second language being more than a school subject because second language learning impacts students identity in a more direct way than some other subjects, one can argue that language teaching also relate to teacher indemnity in multiple ways. Therefore, it is surprising that the attention given to the investigation of language teacher identity is relatively low. One reason for the scarcity of such research might lie in the fact that it is difficult to conceptualize L2 motivation and identity within the framework of a single study, as traditionally diverse range of research strategies employed in the investigation of these constructs. Until recently, L2 motivation research has been conducted mostly in a modular view, i.e., motivational processes are measured as individual variables on their own, while identity research followed a more social tradition using, for example, ethnographic research, which employed qualitative strategies and considered information in social contexts as well (Ushioda, 2008). In terms of existing identity and L2 motivation research,

4.2 Empirical Studies on L2 Teachers’ Motivation

61

Stranger-Johannessen and Norton’s (2017) study related teachers’ identity to investment models and argued convincingly that motivational processes fuel the type of identities teachers strive to reach. Based on Norton’s sociological investment theory, developed for language learners first, three motivation-related processes are seen as decisive: identity, capital and ideology (Darvin & Norton, 2015). The particular interrelationships among these constructs influence dispositions toward the utility of various activities, i.e., to what extent learning a foreign language is considered useful and how learners strive to control the process of learning. When Norton (2017) developed her investment model in which she described the motivational characteristics of foreign language teachers, she managed to present how investment theory affected classroom work for teachers. Based on Norton’s considerations, teachers’ exercise of agency was the most important motivational force. The notion of exercise of agency is linked to the construct of autonomy, which refers to the degree of responsibility taken in a given situation. Norton was not the only one who had researched the idea of agency and its relation to motivation and identity. Reinders and Lázáro (2011) also explored teachers’ autonomy and motivation by mapping 46 distance teachers’ work. When teacher and student beliefs were compared to learner autonomy and its role in the motivational and learning process, it emerged that the concept of agency was indeed inherent in both motivation and identity. However, learner autonomy needed to be facilitated as learners often failed to share teachers’ views on the importance of autonomy and independent learning skills. These emerging differences between teacher and student beliefs with regard to autonomy created challenges for teachers and led to self-reflection as well as changes in their identity. This showed how teaching experiences motivated changes in identity and practice. Apart from autonomy, Dörnyei’s (2005, 2009b) L2 Motivational Self System theory can be regarded as another theoretical and conceptual link between identity and L2 motivation research within the classroom setting because it includes selfand experience-related concepts as well. I have described the model in Sect. 2.4.2 and summarized the studies investigating teacher selves and experiences (Hiver, 2013; Kubanyiova, 2007, 2015; Sahakyan, Lamb, & Chambers, 2018; Thompson & Vásquez, 2015). These studies managed to show the importance of teacher selves, in terms of both teaching practices and professional development. However, it is important to point out that there are markedly fewer studies on teacher motivation in spite of this model having generated a large amount of research on students’ motivation. The lack of research conducted in teacher motivation can be explained if we consider the inherent differences between student and teacher motivation. First, the aim of the studies exploring students’ various selves was mostly to explain an outcome variable, such as intended effort or motivated learning behavior. In studies focusing on teachers, on the other hand, no apparent single outcome variable seems to exist. Moreover, student-related studies very often employed quantitative techniques, while teacher-related ones were often researched qualitatively. Cleary, it is more difficult to reach a large number of teachers than students for quantitative investigations. Yet, I think this model could be a useful starting point for researching student-teacher interactions (Kubanyiova, 2015) and it would be beneficial to have more systematic research exploring the role of experiences related to L2 teacher motivation (Csizér &

62

4 Teacher Motivation in Hungary

Kálmán, 2019b) in terms of their impact on different selves, teaching practices and the amount of effort invested in teachers’ work. I would like to contribute to this line of research with my mixed-methods study, presented in Sects. 4.5 and 4.6 below. In order to address conceptual and empirical challenges presented by L2 motivation research related to teachers, several research strategies have been proposed. Kimura (2014), for example, researched teacher motivation using the principles of complex dynamic system theory to understand the motivational profiles of two English teachers in two different schools in Beijing. In his longitudinal study, he explored the characteristics that defined motivation in the long run in order to map the stability of motivation for these teachers. The main emerging motivating components were as follows: (1) School context. In one of the schools, a new local curriculum was introduced that strongly reflected the beliefs of the participants, which, not surprisingly had a positive impact on teacher motivation. (2) Teachers’ responsibility for students’ success. Experiences of success for learners can stem for various sources, such as successful language use or exams. (3) Teacher development as a source of motivation, that is, teachers feel motived by achieving goals to expand their professional knowledge. These results, thus, point to the importance of both contextual influences and personal characteristics in shaping teacher’s motivation. In a different context, Henry (2019) opted for a case study research strategy that concentrated on pre-service teachers’ identity formation from the complexity perspective. Although motivation is not specifically covered in his study, the issues described in relation to the identity formation during teaching practices were closely linked to teacher motivation (as the informant said: “I am there to learn” Henry, 2019, p. 274): the need to gain on-site experience, the imagination of the future self as well as self-confidence, all contributed to long-term engagement in teaching and thus shaped teacher motivation. Similarly, a qualitative strategy was employed by Moodie and Feryok (2015) in their exploration about the profiles of four English teachers in Korea. Although their study did not conceptualize motivation but commitment, I think these two concepts overlap in a sense that they both conceptualize teacher effort and persistence, which form the basis of many definitions of L2 motivation. Their most important result was the illustration of the changes in commitment when transitioning from learning to teaching and thus it seems especially crucial to include English teachers’ prior experiences as learners of the language when exploring commitment. In addition, while emotions seem to be vital for commitment, it was somewhat surprising that changes in language policy and curriculum had not affected teaching processes. In terms of conceptual innovations in L2 research, Mercer and colleagues adapted a fruitful line of research for language teacher motivation by using Dweck’s (1999, 2006) mindset theory. This theory posits that people have different views about the extent their abilities might change and develop, hence, people with fixed as well as growth mindsets are differentiated. The initial dichotomy suggested that in the case of a fixed mindset, one’s ability acts as a constant trait and could not be developed, while people having a growth mindset believe that their ability could and should be developed. The main conclusion of the mindset theory is that students with growth mindsets had a significantly higher level of motivation than students

4.2 Empirical Studies on L2 Teachers’ Motivation

63

with fixed mindsets. Mercer and Ryan (2010) convincingly argue that the mindset theory is especially important in the field of foreign language learning research. They concluded that mindsets were not simply dichotomies but can be conceptualized on a continuum: “Rather than there being a simple dichotomous division between either one mindset or the other, it may be more appropriate to think of learners as having a tendency toward a particular mindset to varying degrees” (p. 438). Within the realm of the mindset theory, another empirical innovation is exemplified in the Austrian context, where Irie, Ryan and Mercer (2018) investigated the mindsets of teacher trainees using the Q methodology (Watts & Stenner, 2007). The Q methodology involves participants sorting various statements according to how much they agreed with them and thus creating unique structures in the answers. Based on their results, the 51 pre-service teachers in the research proved to have open mindsets. Nevertheless, the cause-and-effect relation was far from clear and raised some questions. Did participants choose teaching as a profession because they had had open mindsets to begin with? Did their mindsets become more open as a result of the training they had received? The participants reported that the various aspects of the teaching profession were possible to learn to varying degrees. For example, teaching methodological techniques could be learnt fairly easily, while the social aspect of the work was more difficult to acquire. The main conclusion of this investigation was that mind systems rather than mindsets should be explored in order to account for the complexity of mindsets. Another conceptual consideration when researching L2 teacher motivation should be the exploration of positive emotions and their relation to motivation. Wolff and De Costa (2017) concentrated on positive emotions and argued that new pedagogical models were needed that could help teachers develop their self-reflection when dealing with the emotional burdens of their job (p. 76). This new model can be easily situated in the theoretical perspectives offered by The Douglas Fir Group (De Costa & Norton, 2017; The Douglas Fir Group, 2016). The model which was compiled and presented under the group’s pseudo name ‘The Douglas Fir’, includes three levels: micro level (classroom), meso level (school) and macro level (ideology). Although their work placed identity research at the meso level (De Costa & Norton, 2017; The Douglas Fir Group, 2016), motivation research might cut across all levels. In the classrooms, one can research the impact of teacher motivation on students, at school level one can look at the motivational impact of the local curriculum and how teacher motivation is fostered within schools through teacher development programs. Finally, at the macro level, where the role of values is positioned, the motivating influences of these values could be researched. When discussing emotions, one cannot forget some of the negative consequences of the teaching profession such as teacher burnout, i.e., the processes that leads to a complete loss of motivation. Although there is a large number of empirical studies, investigations specifically targeting foreign or second language teachers are hard to find (Blazsán, 2019). In contexts outside of Hungary, exceptions include Acheson, Taylor and Luna’s (2016) as well as Loh and Liew’s (2016) study which uncovered some factors having caused burnout. These factors include a lack of personal and institutional support, difficulty in motivating students, various emotional burdens

64

4 Teacher Motivation in Hungary

Table 4.1 Emerging themes related to teachers’ burnout in Blazsán (2019, pp. 30–31) Emerging themes

Definitions

Classroom environment The participants’ perceptions about the characteristics of the social environment within the classroom that contributed to their burnout. Social environment

The participants’ views of how the immediate social context in which they work (i.e., leadership and colleagues) and the larger social context in which they function (i.e., students’ parents and society) contributed to their burnout.

Work characteristics

The participants’ views about the qualities of their job as English teachers that contributed to their burnout.

Physical environment

The participants’ views about how the physical surroundings at their workplace contributed to their burnout.

related to teaching, loss of self-confidence in difficulties in assessment and stress about language exams. Blazsán’s (2019) study in the Hungarian context had similar results; based on long interviews with six teachers she had found some emerging themes in relation to burnout within four large domains: classroom, social and physical environments as well as additional work characteristics (Table 4.1). In a different context, Hiver suggested and empirically tested a new concept related to counteracting the effects of the burnout process called teacher immunity (Hiver, 2017; Hiver & Dörnyei, 2017). The concept was based on studies on teachers’ selves within the complex dynamic system theory and was defined “to describe a robust armoring system that emerges in response to high-intensity threats and allows teachers to maintain professional equilibrium and instructional effectiveness” (Hiver, 2017, pp. 669–670). The development of immunity helps teachers fight stress, burnout, overcome difficulties and reach professional success. It is important to note that teacher immunity is not always positive; its counter-productive effects include thwarting teachers to experience positive changes in their profession (Hiver, 2015). In his study dealing with novice L2 teachers, Hiver followed the life of 19 teachers in their first year of work. For three of the teachers, their first year became their last and left the profession, but the majority were successful to counteract initial difficulties and develop their teacher motivation to reach their goals. Hiver (2018) also proposed that resilience was the most important concept related to teacher immunity and motivation. Researching teacher immunity and resilience might construe a new way of looking at teacher motivation, or more importantly, teacher demotivation. However, more empirical studies are needed to see how these concepts relate to or overlap with motivation. Some Hungarian studies are also worth mentioning because of their contextual values. Menyhárt (2008) set out to investigate the dispositions of teachers in higher education. An interesting issue in this context is the investigation of the relationship between motivation and the identity of university tutors. In this case, the differentiating aspect was how much interaction with students was considered to be part of the teaching processes at higher education. Hence, participants were considered either lectures, i.e., tutors, who saw themselves as university lectures whose work was

4.2 Empirical Studies on L2 Teachers’ Motivation

65

mainly to disseminate information during frontal lectures; or teachers, who taught in an interactive way during both seminars and lectures. The perception of being a lecturer or teacher was compared to their motivation profiles. As a result, several issues emerged when the seven participants talked about their work: their choice a motivation, the values and interests related to the teaching professions, intellectual development, planning lessons and responsibilities. Interestingly, Menyhárt (2008) concluded that the participants who had defined themselves as lecturers were mainly motivated by external factors, while tutors who promoted interaction in their teaching were mostly intrinsically motivated. The contextually highly bounded, small-scale qualitative study conducted in a single educational institute means that we might not have transferable results, however, we can confirm that even within a single, welldefined context, identity and motivation are not only strongly related but possibly shape each other in complex ways. The investigation of teacher motivation cannot be complete without the investigation of pre-service teachers and, indeed, there are some studies targeting this population in Hungary. Hardi (2011) found that the motivation of future English teachers related to both learning the language and becoming English teachers. She also found that they had strong instrumental and integrative motivation as well as a high need for achievement but rather surprisingly, their self-confidence was weak. These results are corroborated by Illés and Csizér (2015) who found that practicing teachers often lacked the self-confidence to present themselves to students as role models of competent bilingual speakers. One of the reasons for having low selfconfidence might be linked to their self-perceived language knowledge, which could be investigated in concert with motivation and different selves (see Medgyes, 2017a). In another study involving pre-service teachers, Bosnyák and Gáncs (2012) found that some of these pre-service teachers had not planned to pursue teaching as a career. They chose to undergo training because they had no better idea of what else to do, or they planned to use the new knowledge and skills taught in the training program in another profession. The motivational characteristics emerging in this study included the motivating power of the learning experiences itself, the autonomous nature of the teaching profession and its interpersonal characteristic. The most demotivating theme was the lack of financial incentives. In a more recent study, Smid (2018) shed light on choice motivation regarding the teaching profession. His study systematically researched the various attitudes, selves and experiences to explore their motivational effects. He concluded that pre-service teachers’ ideal selves contributed to their motivation in a direct way as well as indirectly channeling the impact of positive attitudes. The ultimate questions about the motivational characteristics of transitioning from learning to teaching and how motivation changes after graduation and during their novice years in the profession still remain unanswered. These issues have been addressed in some contexts (e.g., Hiver, 2016) but not in Hungary. Contextual variety is added to the L2 teacher motivation in Hungary by Csaba Kálmán, who investigated a corporate context with a dual focus: teacher motivation as well as how teachers motivated their students (Kálmán, 2018). This context involved the highly competitive private sector in Hungary, where national corporations hire a large number of freelance L2 teachers. Kálmán (2018) found that teachers were

66

4 Teacher Motivation in Hungary

motivated by three main aspects of their work: freedom, diversity and flexibility. As one of the participants stated: “I have found freedom and I can do what I really like. I can find out how I can be creative and how I can develop. As long as I feel I can develop, I will always be motivated” (Kálmán, 2018, p. 37). Demotivational themes were linked to the amount of work: too much or too little, something that is much more difficult to control than in public educational settings in Hungary. External expectations could also be demotivating: a particular syllabus one has to follow at a certain company, working early in the morning or not being able to teach in suitable rooms. Empirical studies concentrating on L2 motivation in the Hungarian setting explored a number of different issues but systematic studies on teachers’ dispositions and attitudes are still largely missing. This research niche motivated my research project presented below. In this study, I have attempted to provide a broad explorative investigation that could pave the way to further, more fine-tuned studies on L2 teacher motivation in the future.

4.3 The Design of a Mixed-Methods Study Investigating English Teachers’ Motivation in Hungary Considering the scarcity of L2 teacher motivation research, I set out to design and carry out a mixed-methods study in Hungary which enabled me to collect data on attitudes, dispositions and self-related issues as well as on teachers’ learning and teaching. The study was financed by the Hungarian Academy of Science’s Bolyai Research Grant between 2016 and 2019. Despite the fact that this was a three-year study, the money received was in the form of a personal grant, which meant that research needed to be done individually including a full volume research report. Therefore, I planned a two-phase research project with an initial qualitative part in order to explore issues pertaining to teacher motivation (year 1). In the second year, I designed and validated a questionnaire measuring English teacher motivation as well as collected data with the instrument (N = 198). The final year was dedicated to writing the research report in Hungarian (Csizér, 2020). Some parts of the qualitative results were published in English (Csizér, 2018, 2019a) but the quantitative results have not been published yet. In what follows now, I will first provide a short description of the methods, then present the highlights and summary of the quantitative and qualitative results.

4.4 Methods

67

4.4 Methods 4.4.1 Main Research Questions in the Mixed-Methods Study The main research questions driving the investigation were as follows: 1. What characterizes English teachers’ motivation in Hungary? 2. What impacts English teachers’ motivation in Hungary? In order to answer the research questions, I designed a mixed-methods study (Tashakkori & Teddlie, 2009) with an interview study preceding the questionnaire study. As there was very little information in Hungary about levels of motivation of English teachers, it was important to make an explorative design with the aim of gaining as much information about the topic as possible (Dörnyei, 2007b). The two phases of the study followed each other in a sequential manner and received equal weight (Creswell, 2012).

4.4.2 Participants in the Qualitative Study The definition of teacher was taken at the broadest sense including instructors from each possible context in Hungary from primary school to universities. The qualitative interview study involved 10 English language teachers having 5–25 years of teaching experience (9 had more than 15 years of experience in teaching). There were two male and eight female participants. The selection of the participants was done in a way that maximum variation could be achieved by involving teachers from multiple settings in Hungary. As I used my network to recruit the participants, all of them were teaching in or near Budapest, the capital city of Hungary, where I live and work. All participants have learnt multiple languages with varying success, and all seemed to be content in their profession. (As I planned to investigate L2 teacher motivation, I made a conscious effort not include demotivated teachers in this sample.) A short summary of the participants (with pseudo names) is as follows: • András, born in 1973, has been teaching in a corporate setting for more than 20 years, and for many years without a degree. After obtaining his MA diploma in English Language and Literature much later in his life, he went on to pursue a PhD degree. While working for his degree, he started teaching classes at a university, and this experience broadened his view of teaching. He maintains that he is only interested in teaching people over 18. • Balázs, born in 1971, is teaching at a secondary school in Budapest. He has worked at different private and state secondary schools. He carved out a particular niche for himself (not mentioned here due to reasons of anonymity) in which he is considered one of the leading experts in Hungary. Currently, he is affiliated with one of the best secondary schools in Budapest. He has been teaching intermittently at a university as well.

68

4 Teacher Motivation in Hungary

• Anna was born in 1965, and at the time of the interview lived in a town near Budapest. After she had received her English and Russian teaching degrees, she started working in the private sector teaching English. First, she taught at various companies, but nowadays she only works with private students, mostly in a oneto-one context. • Barbara, born in 1974, had done a double major at university and for a long time she planned a career with her non-language major (withheld for anonymity reasons). After graduating, she started working at the same university where she was doing her PhD. Currently, she is an assistant professor and teaches various language- and subject-related courses. She has been teaching for about 15 years. • Cili, born in 1971, graduated in Budapest as an English and German teacher. She has 19 years of experience teaching English: first, in the private sector, then later in various other contexts. She obtained her PhD a few of years ago and currently teaches English for specific purposes at a university in Budapest. • Dalma, the youngest participant in the sample, was born in 1987; therefore, she has the least amount of experience. She has been teaching at a special needs primary and secondary school for 5 years. She is teaching English as a special needs educator not a teacher [details are withheld]. Once she manages to pay off her students’ loan, she intends to obtain an English teaching degree. • Emese was born in 1963, and she obtained her first degree in teaching Hungarian and Russian. She then received a degree in teaching young learners in an alternative setting and finally, an English teaching degree. Currently she is working toward her PhD and teaches at a university. Earlier she had worked with young learners at a primary school. • Fanni, born in 1969, is teaching at a primary school outside Budapest. She had first completed a Hungarian and Russian teaching degree and then taught Hungarian. While on maternity leave, she obtained an MA in teaching English. She has been teaching English for 15 years both in the private and state sectors. • Gréta was born in 1971, and she is teaching at a secondary school outside Budapest. After completing her English teaching degree, she briefly worked outside the teaching profession, but after that she taught at two secondary schools in Budapest. She has 20 years of teaching experience. • Hajni, born in 1977, currently works at a primary and secondary school in a village near Budapest. She has been teaching English to students of 10–18. She is interested in young learners and teaches at a university as well.

4.4.3 The Interview Guide The final English translation of the instrument is included in Appendix D. Piloting the initial interview guide was done in several steps involving pre-interviews and experts who reviewed the instrument. The interview guide was designed to be semistructured so as to leave some room to change the order of questions during the interview and to keep the interview situation as open as possible without putting

4.4 Methods

69

words into the participants’ mouths (Dörnyei, 2007b). In order to collect data on motivational processes, I asked the participants about their experiences as learners, teacher trainees and teachers. While designing the study, it became apparent to me how much ‘experience’ as a notion had been neglected in L2 motivation studies. This motivated us to guest-edit a full issue in Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching with a colleague (Csizér & Kálmán, 2019a).

4.4.4 Data Collection and Data Analysis of the Qualitative Study The interviews took place between November 2016 and April 2017. The interviews were of different lengths with the shortest being 40 min (with a teacher whose speech was exceptionally fast) and the longest being 1 h and 15 min. The interviews were conducted in Hungarian; the English language excerpts cited below are my translations. The interviews yielded an approximately 70,000-word dataset. The interviews were voice recorded and transcribed verbatim. The transcripts were checked against the voice recordings. The analysis was done thematically with Atlas.ti: first, emerging themes were identified within the topic, and then these themes were fine-tuned after carefully re-reading the interviews. The main emerging themes are presented in Table 4.2.

4.4.5 Participants in the Quantitative Study The validated, Hungarian language questionnaire was completed by 202 English teachers in Hungary. After cleaning the data, the answers of 196 participants were retained of which the majority were females (n = 177; 90.3%). The youngest participant was 25 years old, while the oldest was 63; the mean age was 45 years (with a standard deviation of 9.6 years). The mean length of teaching proved to be 19 years (standard deviation: 10 years), the minimum value was 1 year, while the maximum 40. The majority of the participants (57.1%) were single-subject English teachers. The most often taught second subjects were Hungarian language and literature (11.2%), another foreign language (9.2%) or history (7.1%). Only about the fifth of the participants (22.4%) reported having lived abroad for more than six-months in an English-speaking country.

70 Table 4.2 Emerging themes in the interviews

4 Teacher Motivation in Hungary Emerging main themes

Subthemes

Language learning experiences

Number of coded segments 39

Success

10

Contact

34

Teachers

23

Negative experiences Issues related to teacher education

6 15

Motivation Defining motivation

13

Characteristics of motivated students

9

Motivating students

4

Self-motivation

47

Enhancing own 26 language knowledge Choice motivation

15

Impact of teacher motivation

44

Self-confidence

21

Expectancy and value

23

Ideal teacher self

21

Attributional processes

20

Professional goals

Explaining success

15

Explaining failure

14 25

4.4.6 The Questionnaire Several constructs were created and piloted on L2 teacher motivation in the present study. There were multiple sources informing the constructs in addition to earlier conceptualizations of L2 teacher motivation. The interview study had preceded the design of the questionnaire. In addition, the pilot study validating the constructs was also supplemented by an expert interview. Earlier empirical studies include: Csizér (2018, 2019a), Dörnyei (1994, 2001a). Dörnyei and Ushioda (2011), Gardner (2006) and Kormos and Csizér (2008). The full version of the questionnaire can be found in Appendix E.

4.4 Methods

71

Two scales were designed to serve as dependent scales measuring teachers’ intended effort invested in their work. 1.

Motivated teaching behavior (8 statements): summarizing intended effort to invest in one’s teaching work. Sample item: “It is very important for me that I deliver good quality lessons for the students.” 2. Motivated professional development (7 statements): how much effort participants put into their professional development because they see it as an important part of their job. Sample item: “I regularly attend professional development sessions so that I can improve professionally.” A number of independent scales measured possible influences on motivated teaching behavior and motivation professional development. 3. Attitudes related to teaching—the affective dimension (8 statements): subsuming positive dispositions toward teaching. Sample item: “I love teaching very much.” 4. Attitudes related to teaching—the cognitive dimension (7 statements): including reasons participants think their work is important. Sample item: “I think my job as a language teacher is important because English is the language of the world.” 5. Foreign language learning experiences (5 statements): the extent to which teaching is influenced by previous foreign language learning experiences. Sample item: “My own language learning experiences have strongly influenced me as a teacher.” 6. Foreign language teaching experiences (4 statements): summarizing positive teaching experiences. Sample item: “I enjoy my classes.” 7. Successful teacher self (7 statements): the extent to which participants feel that they are successful in their work. Sample item: “I feel that I am a successful language teacher.” 8. Experiencing the success of students (5 statements): the extent to which participants think that their success is the students’ success in learning the foreign language. Sample item: “My success is my students’ success.” 9. Experiencing professional development (5 statements): dispositions toward professional development as an experience: “What I like about teaching is that my knowledge about teaching methodologies is constantly improving.” 10. Self-confidence (5 statements): the extent to which participants feel selfconfident about various aspects of their work. Sample item: “All in all, I feel confident in my work.” 11. Self-reflection (11 statements): the level of self-reflection as part of working as a teacher. Sample item: “If something went wrong during a lesson, I spend a lot of time thinking about why it went wrong.” 12. Demotivation (18 items): a collection of possible demotivational aspects in the work of teachers.

72

4 Teacher Motivation in Hungary

4.4.7 Data Collection and Data Analysis of the Questionnaire Study Data collection was completed using an online platform and lasted from April 2018 to June 2018. Participation was voluntary and anonymous. Given that data was collected through online platforms at the end of a school year, motivated teachers might be overrepresented in my sample. However, results seem to be comparable to the results of Illés and Csizér (2018), whose study employed a representative nation-wide sample earlier in the same year. For further comparative results of various L2 teacher samples, see Szrogh and Csizér (in press). Data analysis was carried out with SPSS 22.0, in several steps. First, data cleaning and reliability analyses were performed and then the scales were set up. Various descriptive and inferential statistics were run to explore the dataset to its fullest potential, but due to the sample size, correlational analyses provided the backbone of my results.

4.5 The Main Results of the Interview Study As neither the scope nor the length of this book allows for a complete presentation of the qualitative data, I wish to highlight and summarize the most important results only.

4.5.1 Language Learning Experience and Its Impact on Teacher Motivation The most important results concerning English teachers’ experiences include language learning success and intercultural contact experiences as the core parts of past experiences (see Table 4.3; see also Csizér, 2018, 2019a; Csizér & Kálmán, 2019b). In addition, early encounters with foreign language teachers contributed to experiences to a large degree as reported by the participants, while, interestingly, language teacher trainers seemed to have a lesser impact. Recounted experiences were mostly positive, which is in contrast with earlier studies conducted in Hungary (Nikolov, 2001) but this might be due to the specific sample in the present investigation. Based on the data obtained about the impact of learning experiences, I identified two major themes related to L2 motivation: self -confidence and ways of teaching (Csizér, 2019a).

4.5 The Main Results of the Interview Study Table 4.3 Summary of the main emerging themes and participants concerning language learning experience (bases on Csizér, 2019a, p. 321)

4.5.1.1

73

Themes

Participants

Success

András, Balázs, Anna, Barbara, Cili, Dalma, Fanni, Hajni

Contact

András, Balázs, Anna, Cili, Dalma, Emeset, Fanni, Hajni

Teacher-related

Barbara, Dalma, Emese, Fanni, Gréta, Hajni

Teaching method

Balázs, Barbara, Cili, Fanni, Gréta, Hajni

Positive attitudes

Anna, Barbara, Cili, Fanni, Gréta, Hajni

Diligence, effort, persistence

András, Barbara, Emese

Self-confidence

András, Dalma

Classroom/school

Dalma, Emese

Being active part of learning

Balázs

Parents

Barbara

Acceptance, inclusion

Dalma

Multilingualism

Cili

Negative attitudes

Emese

Pen-pals

Gréta

Music

Gérta

Self-Confidence

Self-confidence, i.e., one’s beliefs about their own abilities and one’s coping potentials relevant to a range of tasks and subject domains, seems to be an important outcome of language learning experiences. In terms of self-confidence, one of the emerging themes related to experience proved to be the length of one’s teaching career. Anna, for example, said: “I’ve been teaching for 25 years. During this time, I’ve learnt a lot of things. That’s the reason why I’m pretty self-confident.” András and Cili were in agreement, and Cili explained: “I think it’s time actually. I’ve been teaching for 15 years and I’ve taught different things.” Cili recalled how much her self-confidence had grown compared to when she first started giving lessons at a company, feeling too anxious to even enter the classroom. She added that selfconfidence alone would not mean knowing everything and not wanting to develop further. She was self-confident enough to admit to her shortcomings. Hajni also reflected on how her self-confidence had developed over time: “At the beginning, I was completely lacking in self-confidence. In the first year, when I started teaching, I had all kinds of experiences. There were times when I came out of the classroom crying and saying that I was not going to be able to do this. The first year is typical in this sense, it’s like a front-line battle. But I’ve learnt a lot from it.”

74

4 Teacher Motivation in Hungary

The second emerging theme associated with self-confidence was language proficiency which, in turn, related to contact experiences for many participants. In the initial conceptualization of self-confidence in foreign language learning, selfconfidence was linked to the quality and quantity of intercultural contact (Clément, 1980). The present study has found this connection to be a major theme. In terms of the interconnectedness of contact experiences and self-confidence, I could see both sides of the coin. Fanni spoke for the other participants as well when she remarked: “I’m really lucky to have been given the chance to live abroad so many times and be able to speak English at a high level.” Self-confidence may come with the feeling that no teacher can possibly know everything. In Cili’s words: “Sometimes, I don’t know how to pronounce a word, or I have to look up the meaning of a word. It happens. Teachers don’t know everything. I don’t know every word in my mother tongue either.” Somewhat similarly, Balázs, who spent years abroad as a middle-schooler explained: “Generally speaking, I am self-confident but there are topics which make me less self-confident. I cannot really give students open-ended tasks about food”, because self-admittedly, he knows very little about how to store and prepare food. Not having the knowledge in his mother tongue makes him outsource certain topics to students who are more knowledgeable. “Typically, I either get students to do it or I do it in a different way. Never without control. I’m afraid that there’ll be too many I-do-not-know answers from me.” As not all students have opportunities to spend an extended time in L2 speaking communities, it is very important to consider how András insisted that he should be a role-model for his students as he had learnt English in the classroom. In his interview, he recounted how spending time in the UK in his 20 s had contributed very little to his English knowledge but provided him with a high level of self-confidence to believe that someone could learn a foreign language without having lived in the second language community. This learning experience (or rather the perceived lack of learning in the UK) in the L2 community was decisive for András. It was transferred to his present teaching practice in such a way that he could develop skills to positively influence the self-confidence levels of his current students by demonstrating that a foreign language could be learnt in their home country. In his own words: “I am a very good role model in this respect. You do not have to go abroad to learn a foreign language.” Data on self-confidence, as well as the fact that the success of language learning was an essential part of the experience, suggest important pedagogical considerations. What we need to think about is how self-confident English teachers, who were successful learners before becoming teachers, might have difficulty in realizing that foreign language learning can be challenging for some students. Therefore, being empathetic to students needs and supportive in their learning process should be highlighted. Future research of the role of empathy should take into account how student and teacher experiences differ (Mercer, 2016).

4.5 The Main Results of the Interview Study

4.5.1.2

75

Ways of Teaching

In terms of current teaching practices and ways of teaching, a number of themes, subthemes and categories emerged but their specificity had differing depths. Focused and specific teacher-initiated tips and tricks were mentioned as well as certain traditions in teaching and, in particular, teaching methods. It was clear that prior language learning experiences had an impact on current teaching practices in different ways. Starting with specific techniques, tricks and even tasks, Anna mentioned a game she had learnt from her first teacher, involving one’s working memory, which she has been using regularly for more than 30 years. Hajni described how she organized tea parties in the classroom to enhance students’ experiences because this was something she had experienced as a student. In terms of general disposition toward teaching, Barbara talked at length about her learning experiences at a dual language secondary school in Hungary. Her experience was largely shaped by the fact that both Hungarian and American/British teachers were employed at the school and it made her realize very early on how much the two educational systems differed. In her opinion, the Hungarian system was more rigid and based on rote learning, while the Anglo-Saxon system was more open to students’ ideas. She found it revealing that while they were students, they became aware of how different Hungarian and native English-speaking staff were and that they often clashed over teaching methods. Students had also acknowledged the link between teachers’ disposition to teaching and its relation to students’ experiences. Recalling her experience, she said: “there was one striking instance [not detailed] when we had realized the fact that Hungarian and Anglo-Saxon education were different.” The details she shared when prompted by a follow-up question were affected by her current pedagogical practices: “I remember our history teacher who said he wanted us to think and form our own opinion. And this was really unusual at the time. What was going on? - we thought. Why did he not just tell us the answer?” “I don’t think I’m the kind of teacher who goes into the classroom and tells students what to think and give them the perfect answer. This way of teaching is really alien to me.” Similarly, Anna, who participated in a study trip in Britain, had similar experiences and the conclusion she arrived at was as follows: “knowledge-based teaching might not be as useful as a skill-based one: using simple techniques that let students see things from different angles might lead to more knowledge in the long run.” Balázs mentioned how he had learnt English through content-based teaching and how this experience had helped him understand this way of learning and teaching: “it’s a defining experience and I really like it when I can teach through CLIL [Content and Language Integrated Learning] and I can transfer all kinds of content, teaching language through these contents.” One of the strengths of CLIL, according to him, is that students can take the center stage in learning, a position that was another defining experience he had had as a student: It is very important that I enjoyed the lessons where I was an active part of the learning process. When the lesson focused on me and not my teacher. When things happened the way I wanted them to happen, and not the teacher. That’s the reason why I’m not trying to be at

76

4 Teacher Motivation in Hungary the center of attention in my lessons. I think this particular skills development works best when the teacher is able to make students take an active part in the lessons.

Another student-related concept mentioned was engagement, and Emese pointed out its importance as a central component of successful teaching. Hajni shared a similar opinion but from a different point of view: “I learnt from my own teacher that you can trust the kids and their creativity. And their ideas.” The “Anglo-Saxon way of teaching” mentioned by Barbara emerged in some of the interviews. The participants who had spent time in the US learning English (Dalma and Fanni) explained how that context impacted the way they teach today. Fanni’s considerations are closely linked to the characteristics of immersion learning. She realized that it was important to create “real-life” experiences in the classroom in which “native speaker situations” provided the learning experiences. She also found that it was indispensable to allow students to bring their own experiences to the classes. Although it is debatable how much native speaker situations are indispensable and why non-native speakers cannot provide opportunities to practice the language (see Illés & Csizér, 2015), it is clear that Fanni refers to the importance of language use as opposed to language learning: “the real experience in language learning is when someone understands specific situations, films and TV series.” Fanni also explained that language use had also helped her maintain the level of her English: “I try to keep up my English knowledge in order to be able to offer more to my students than grammar rules.” For Dalma the contextual characteristics proved to be a defining influence rather than the actual teaching process. More specifically, the personality of her teacher made a difference: “He fully accepted the way I was.” Tolerance and acceptance have remained a must in her teaching as she is dealing with special needs students. In a classroom learning context, teaching is often interwoven with assessment. Indeed, Balázs mentioned an example about a particular course he was teaching when his own dispositions toward teaching, shaped by his experiences, and the need for students to pass an exam at the end of the course were not in harmony and students wanted more exam preparatory tasks than he was willing to provide. One of the difficulties in the classroom context stems from the fact that experiences might be different for teachers and students. Still a balance needs to be achieved between students’ needs and teachers’ experience-based teaching. The memory became important as Balázs was teaching an English language course at a university he had previously taken: he remembered how the learning experiences of his former classmates had differed from his own, due to the fact that the level of his own English was more advanced than that of his classmates (due to having lived abroad for an extended period of time). The differences in proficiency resulted in different needs; he was more relaxed toward exams and wanted to enjoy the classes, while his classmates were more receptive to exam-oriented instruction. Instead of recreating such a mismatch for his own students, he realized that the gap between the experiences of teachers and students and the link between teachers’ learning experiences and students’ needs should be appeased in teaching.

4.5 The Main Results of the Interview Study

77

Some participants found that self-confidence and ways of teaching were interconnected. In Barbara’s words: “I think I’m self-confident in that I know what I want to do. and I know how to achieve it. I can see what works with students.” Dalma, working with special needs students, links her self-confidence to having had experiences with many different teaching methods and techniques; she has tried them and now knows how they work with students of various learning difficulties. Past experiences were not always positive and some of the interviewees mentioned issues that needed to be avoided as much as possible or rejected as a principle. Balázs experienced corporal punishment in middle school. Another issue was frontal teaching and having to be silent and listening to the teacher all the time (Cili). Another interviewee was experiencing stress, anxiety and boredom (Emese), which Emese tries to avoid in her own teaching practice. These types of experiences were summed up well by Cili: “Some say that you teach the way you were taught. I hope that this is not true in my case.”

4.5.1.3

Interim Summary

Based on Csizér (2018, 2019a), former language learning experiences of English teachers proved to be complex constructs subsuming several interwoven themes. Among these the most important ones are as follows: (1) Former teachers’ personality and teaching practices; (2) various attitudes and dispositions toward learning as part of L2 learning experiences; (3) contact experiences; and (4) self-related issues including experiencing success and self-confidence (for a visual representation, see Csizér, 2019a, p. 326.) In terms of former teachers, both their personality and teaching methods can have a lasting impact, which, in Zimmermann’s (2000) taxonomy of experiences, are labelled as vicarious experiences, that is, comparing oneself to a model. The present results are, to a degree, in contrast with earlier findings about Hungarian teachers being somewhat hesitant to present themselves as role models (Illés & Csizér, 2015), but it seems that the successes they had experienced as learners could help their own self-confidence as well as their students’ grow. On the other hand, these results are in line with Nikolov’s (2001) findings who, although researching demotivation, illustrated the central influencing role of teachers in the classroom learning process. As the interviews were retrospective in nature, and participants recounted stories experienced 10–30 years earlier, it seems that what teachers experienced when they were students has a lasting effect on how they teach. Finally, the relationship between success and self-confidence needs to be considered. The notion of success is rarely operationalized in L2 motivation studies, although the bon-mot ‘nothing motivates more than success’ is often used. Based on the current data, it seems that the link between experiencing success and self-efficacy beliefs might not only be important for current learners of foreign languages as found by Piniel and Csizér (2013) in the Hungarian context, but also in a retrospective way for teachers of foreign languages. However, I have to note that both success and self-confidence seem to be a double-edged sword. On the one hand, it is clear that

78

4 Teacher Motivation in Hungary

contact is a positive contributor to teachers’ self-confidence which, in turn, relates to their own foreign language knowledge and being successful. On the other hand, it is important to model students how to increase their own self-confidence without spending time abroad as not all of them will have opportunity to spend extended time abroad. It should not be implied that instructed language learning is only useful in the actual L2 community, and not in a foreign context where the language is not spoken outside the classroom. Looking at the data collected, it seems that teachers have differing views on this issue: some encourage their students to spend some time aboard, while others try to demonstrate that foreign languages can be learnt in the home country within a classroom setting.

4.5.2 Teachers’ Views on Motivation: Choice Motivation and the Teacher Self Two of the interviewees (András and Emese) said that they had wanted to become language teachers for as long as they had remembered: “I’ve wanted to become a language teacher since kindergarten” (András). Coincidentally, both of them grew up in localities near the border where foreign languages were part of their everyday lives. The majority of participants said that it was a coincidence that they had become English teachers (for example, Balázs said that nothing better had come to his mind and that he had always liked the school environment). This is somewhat surprising because teacher education has always been a long process in Hungary (see Chapter 1) and it is not entirely clear why one would embark on teacher training course without having a strong commitment to it. Both Barbara and Cili claimed that they had never imagined themselves becoming language teachers but their teaching practice (which was toward the very end of their teacher training program) went well and it was enjoyable, so they decided to give it a try. It was revealing to hear that Cili had thought her personality would not suit the teaching profession, but later realized that many aspects of the teaching profession could be learnt. Having an open mindset about these aspects (see Sect. 4.2) drew her to the profession. Another late decisionmaker was Gréta, who had been a teacher of Hungarian language and literature for many years when she decided to retrain as an English teacher during her maternity leave. (Maternity leave can be a maximum of two to three years in Hungary, and its duration can increase depending on the number of children). Compared to these early and later committers, the other interviewees made the decision somewhere in between: toward the end of her secondary school education, Hajni decided to become a teacher as some of her family members were teachers as well. Similarly, Fanni was inspired by her mother, who taught foreign languages, and realized that she herself had a talent for foreign languages. Participants’ teacher selves showed much more strength than their choice motivation, as none of the participants could imagine having another job. As Emese declared: “I usually say that as long as I can open my mouth, I remain a teacher.”

4.5 The Main Results of the Interview Study

79

Also, in the coming years, many of them see themselves in very similar positions as now. As András said: “I do not wish for big changes”. Fanni also said: “[In ten years, I see myself] in the same position as today. I hope I’ll be able to accept getting older and having to slow down a bit, but I see myself working in a similar way.” Balázs wishes for no changes either but explains his view in a more complex way: “It’s very important to me to have something that is entirely up to me. The trap or trick in teaching is that it’s not up to me. Therefore, I always have a project for myself that I can get on with just the way I want to. For example, if I write a book, it will be how I want it to be.” Similarly to Balázs, the alternatives mentioned by others were linked to teaching, for example, doing teaching-related research (Barbara), developing online content for digital teaching (Cili), and completing a PhD (Emese).

4.5.2.1

Motivating Oneself and Students

Several themes emerged in connection with motivating oneself and students. First, I will describe the emerging themes separately and then I compare and contrast them. • In terms of own motivation, one of the central issues was avoiding demotivation. Some participants mentioned how important it was to recognize demotivational influences and how re-motivating oneself was not only possible but necessary. Situational demotivation can happen in the classroom during lessons, and interestingly, both Emese and Dalma explained that when these demotivating instances appeared during classes, they turned their backs to students for a couple of seconds to gain some privacy in the classroom and pull themselves together. Fanni mentioned that she tried to avoid demotivating instances originating from outside of the classroom before entering the lessons: “I very rarely let outside events affect what is happening in the lesson.” One of my interviewees had a personal way of gauging her own motivation. Toward the end of semester, no matter how busy she was, she would bake some cakes for her students: “This is my trick. This is how I monitor myself. The moment I cannot take cakes to class, that’s when I’ll stop teaching.” • For some participants, in-service training was another issue seen as a motivating factor. András, for example, explained that obtaining his PhD was a way to motivate himself in his work and that its motivational impact would last for one or two years, but after that he would need new challenges in order to maintain his motivation. • To motivate herself, Gréta mentioned the need to keep up with the younger generations, which means that she consciously makes an effort to get to know the digital world her students inhabit. This means that she not only makes use of these technologies for personal reasons, but she uses then in her teaching as well: “I am all for ‘teaching how to use it’ and not forbid using it. But I need to know what I’m doing.” • Novelty appeared to be another emerging theme: new tasks, new games, which not only motivate students but have positive effects on teachers as well. “How

80

4 Teacher Motivation in Hungary

do I motivate myself? I try newer and newer, interesting games and tasks. Games are a very important part of my teaching. Giving new tasks to students can make them fly. I always realize that you don’t need to do big things […] When I take something new into class and they enjoy it, it’s a very good feeling and it motivates me to do it again, however small the tasks I give to my students” (Anna). • One participant mentioned that in order to motivate herself, sometimes she needs to take a break from teaching in order to recharge herself: she goes running, talks to friends or simply cooks a good meal: “Teaching takes a lot out of you. Once I’ve recharged myself, I can pay attention to my classes with renewed energy” (Hajni). It is hardly surprising that all participants agreed that motivation impacted their work to a great extent. Some of them added that on Monday mornings or after a longer break, it was more difficult to find motivation. Participants also acknowledged that their motivation fluctuated (Balázs, Barbara), but Balázs explained that he could do his work without being motivated: “I managed to do the lessons quite well even whilst not even at full steam” although he added that he was sure students could feel it when he was not motivated. Both András and Emese explained what it was like for them to be present in their own lessons. “Since I finished my PhD, I’ve felt that I can be present in my classes much more because there’s nothing at the back of my mind telling me that I have to do something else. This means that I can teach feeling much more relaxed and that’s such a relief. I’m sure students can sense this” (András). He also added: “I can be free and easy.” Anna and Dalma explained that motivation was interrelated for them: motivated students motivate their teacher and only a motivated teacher can motivate their students. Barbara mentioned that her expectations toward herself create facilitating anxiety, in turn: “I’m a bit anxious when I enter the classroom, I want to do it well, which means I’m excited.” She remembered a negative experience about a university tutor who was bored in their own classes. For Cili, professional development was a way of maintaining her own motivation: “You need to learn and try new things so that you don’t lose your motivation. Teaching the same book 28 times, does not motivate me but if I keep adding new elements to the same book, for example a video, it carries an element of self- motivation and I can learn something new.” Personal problems can occur, but some participants said that they should not affect their teaching motivation (Gréta, Dalma and Fanni). They explained it was important to leave their personal lives behind when they entered the classroom to concentrate on their group. Fanni added: “If there’s a problem, it definitely shows and then I communicate it to a certain degree.” Gréta mentioned that she recognized signs of burn-out on her colleagues which could lead to serious demotivation. This works in both ways though: Hajni explained how she had used positive experiences from her life to motivate students. Her example included reading a good book in the summer which she could hardly wait to share with her group. When she did, her enthusiasm motivated her students. In terms of motivating oneself, several issues emerged for teachers. Most importantly, incorporating new approaches/tasks, digital technology used in classroom learning and setting new challenges. In addition, it seems to be very important to

4.5 The Main Results of the Interview Study

81

spot demotivating instances and conscientiously counteract them as well as stepping back from teaching regularly to recharge. This ability to motivate oneself and counteract demotivating instances is rarely touched in student motivation, for an exception see Ushioda’s (2001) investigation of motivational thinking and the role of attribution theory (i.e., explaining our failures and successes) in L2 motivation. When it comes to motivating students, the easy way out for a teacher is to say that as long as students turn up for classes feeling motivated, it should be easy to teach them. When I was discussing the definitions of L2 motivation in Chapter 2, I mentioned that many participants regarded motivation as an interactional process between students and teachers. They accepted their roles in motivating students while acknowledged the fact that teaching motivated students can be motivating in itself. The question of whose responsibility it was to motivate students was addressed by Balázs in an excellent way: “This is the real question: to what extent are we willing to teach the way they learn? And to what extent do we expect them to learn the way we teach? This is a constant dilemma.” Along the lines of this dilemma, several themes have emerged in terms of how teachers can motivate their students. • Setting a good example by sharing own experiences (András, Anna and Barbara) about difficulties of foreign language learning and how one might overcome such difficulties as well as by showing one’s enthusiasm in order to engage students (Emese). • Designing dynamic lessons in which several different types of tasks and ways of working are introduced that can create interesting lessons (András, Barbara and Balázs). Adding games and humor to lessons (Hajni). In András’ words: “students should really feel great in the lessons, they should want to come back because they enjoy the lessons so much”. • Increasing self -confidence (Anna). • Encouraging students to find links between the content of the syllabus and their own interests in order to create a personalized content for themselves (Barbara), in other words: interest as the central component of motivation. • Cili explained that in the tertiary educational context where she teaches English, one has to acknowledge the motivational power of the language exam. She also added that passing a language exam might not be sufficient for one to be motivated. She expressed her skepticism: “Students cannot be motivated once they have reached a certain level and feel that it is enough for them. You cannot do anything.” • The motivational impact of teachers’ feedback. There was one participant who provided individualized feedback for his students (Balázs), while Dalma, who is teaching special needs students, underlined the importance of positive feedback and praise. Fanni explained that she was aware of how bad grades could be demotivating, therefore, she always emphasizes that they should be seen as temporary and not personal: “When I provide negative feedback, I always do that in a loving way. I say that this is unacceptable. I always tell them this when I am angry. But these things are independent from my love toward them. I dislike certain dispositions and (a lack of) achievement, but I do not disparage them as persons.”

82

4 Teacher Motivation in Hungary

• Providing students with opportunities to enhance their language skills outside the classroom (Balázs). • Classroom competitions (Balázs, Dalma). Balázs: “My competitions are always learning competitions not proficiency ones.” • Humor (Anna, Fanni): “Humor is a common denominator. It usually brings people together” (Anna). • Finding common interests in popular culture: “It’s obvious that one’s getting older and certain doors close. I’m not sure I’ll understand the music they listen to, the series they watch, but for now, we still have a lot of things in common. I can still understand their language. It’s possible that I’ll lose this in a couple of years. I don’t want to hold on to this, I don’t want to have the mentality of a teenager when I am 65. I won’t watch those series just for their sake, but for now, we have this bond” (Fanni). • Body language, non-verbal communication, “an honest smile” (Fanni). • Trust. Gréta, who is teaching in a primary school, explained that the most important aspect of motivation for her was to gain students’ trust. She added that a crucial part of this process is to gain the trust of the parents, which is often a more difficult issue: “With the students, this happens more quickly and it’s almost inevitable in our eight years together, and this helps because it motivates them. You don’t have to change the world every day, you don’t have to save the kids each day. There are no tricks, just their trust.” When talking about whose responsibility it was to motivate students, contextual difference colored what participants had said, and apart from teachers and students, another ‘stakeholder’ was mentioned. Balázs mentioned the possible motivating roles of course book writers, while other participants, particularly those teaching younger age groups, brought up the role of parents and family background (Hajni, Gréta, and Fanni). A quote from Fanni illustrates this latter idea: “It helps us a lot if a student comes from a family where the school is seen as a workplace.” Balázs, Dalma and Emese shared similar views saying that a way of motivating students is to show them the possible links between new information and students’ lives. Anna, who works in the private sector, claims that it is the students’ responsibility to keep up their motivation as they are paying for the classes from their own pockets. As motivating students can be difficult, Cili wished it was not a task for teachers. But she acknowledged that “if students do not motivate themselves, the teacher has to try to do it.” A similar view was shared by Barbara: “It’s partly the teachers’ responsibility [to motivate students] but without the students’ cooperation, there’s not much the teacher can do.” Both Cili and Barbara teach at universities and they thought that grading as such might be motivating in different ways from grading in compulsory education. Barbara felt that sometimes she failed to motivate her students because “I cannot say with full confidence and conviction that the lowest grade is not a good grade” (Barbara). Gréta compared responsibility in L2 motivation to a three-legged chair with the three legs representing the different stakeholders: teachers, students, parents: “I really think that we are all in this together and if one leg is missing the chair will not be stable.” Hajni understands that it is the teachers’ responsibility to motivate

4.5 The Main Results of the Interview Study

83

students but sometimes the process is a mystery to her: “I really don’t know what will make a breakthrough, what makes students realize that something is important to learn.” Finally, Balázs’s opinion presents a good example of L2 motivation in the compulsory educational system: “I don’t think that if given the choice, no matter how much students like school, they’d choose it over staying at home, gaming. I don’t think they’d say: I don’t want to stay at home and play, I want to go to school. Schools should not be cordoned off from students preventing them from going in at the weekends.” When comparing ways of motivating oneself as well as students, an obvious difference is the actual number of emerging themes. It seems that my participants were much more attuned to talking about possible and perceived ways of motivating students than motivating themselves. When talking about their own motivation, teachers did not fail to explain how they had consciously dealt with demotivating instances and how they tried to re-motivate themselves (for similar results see Falout, 2012; Garai, 2016; Trang & Baldauf, 2007). However, the issue of remotivation was completely missing from the student-related data.

4.5.3 Motivation and Attribution: Explaining Successes and Failures There are very few studies dealing with attribution in L2 motivation (see Chapter 2) and they almost exclusively deal with students. I think it is important to map the attributional processes of English language teachers: How they explain their successes and failures (Dörnyei, 2001a; Graham, 1999; Ushioda, 2001; Weiner, 1984, 1992). A number of themes emerged as to what constituted success and failure for teachers. The main experiences of success, in the current context, included successful language exams, good lessons, and being able to deal with a demanding student. In terms of failure, not being able to establish rapport with students stood out as a theme: “if there’s a student I cannot deal with, or when one student gets out of hand, that’s a failure” (Balázs). Likewise, other participants explained that the first thing they would do is to establish a good relationship with the students. Other types of negative experiences were linked to failures or breakdowns in lessons.

4.5.3.1

Explaining Successes

For András, success came from the energy he had put into his work and the fact that he had been a good language learner himself. He added that he had worked on his personal issues for years: “I’m happy with myself. This has really helped me with my personal interactions as well.” He also thought that success stemmed from his personality that may help the teaching process: “I’m empathetic, I like listening to people, I’m conscientious and pay attention to detail.” And also: “I do not shy

84

4 Teacher Motivation in Hungary

away from competition; I want to be the best teacher at my company. I’m really achievement-oriented and very principled. I’m strict and consistent.” Similarly to András, Barbara singled out effort as a source of success: “I need to put work into teaching.” Interestingly, the reason why she thinks in this way comes from how she sees herself compared to others: communication does not come easily and naturally to her: “I think I’m not like that.” Therefore, to be successful, she needs to put in the work. Cili also mentioned that the hard part of teaching is paying attention to her students: “I really try hard to pay attention to everyone, to what they’re doing, why they’re doing it, or why they’re not doing it.” In the same vain, Anna linked her successes to her personality traits, and thought that she had the skills and ability to shape people. She also mentioned luck: “I’m lucky that I’m doing a job I’m good at.” When explaining his successes, Balázs cited his failures: “One of the important experiences of the past ten years is that the line between success and failure is blurred because one can turn into the other. And failures are very important because they can become successes later on. It’s important to experience failures.” When Balázs experiences of failure, he thinks at length about how he could have avoided it. For Dalma, who teaches special needs students, success is when students make an effort: “I just show them a method of learning English. I’ve shown one, and for some students two, there, four or five methods.” It is revealing to see how tirelessly she comes up with new ways of teaching her students yet, success for her is her students’ effort not her own. The context of teaching seems to be a defining factor for such an effort in Dalma’s case. Similarly, Hajni has defined success as being able to see students understand and use some parts of the language successfully. The amount of effort made, and success experienced do not always go hand in hand. As Emese pointed out: “When a lesson goes really well, it’s not always because I’ve worked hard preparing for it.” She has noticed that sometimes the lessons she spends the least amount of time preparing for are the best. The reason for this is that success is more related to teachers’ skills and not effort (see also Anna and Balázs above). When I asked about what skills she thought were the most important ones, the first one she mentioned was the ability to be present in the lesson: “I think it’s very important for me to be consciously present in my class, my presence should be real and useful. I think I have learnt this skill; I have this ability.” The second source of success for Emese is her flexibility related to classroom decision-making, in particular: A teacher needs to know what to do in a lesson, but also needs to leave room for quick and impromptu changes as well. “Sometimes you have to throw something out that doesn’t belong there for some reason and bring in something new.” For her, an experienced teacher is someone who can improvise: “I don’t mean that they don’t know what to do, but they’re able to think and do things on the spur of the moment and choose from many good practices.” Online decision-making is indeed an inherent part of the teaching process (see Medgyes, 2017b). Similarly to Emese, Fanni also said that the key to success was the ability to put one’s skills to good use. The most important skill for Fanni is being able to establish good rapport with her students whom she can motivate using her energetic personality: “I’m really good at putting shy or inhibited students at ease. I can make

4.5 The Main Results of the Interview Study

85

them believe they can do things they don’t believe they can. I have lots of success stories with these types of students.” Gréta also sees her skills/abilities as the main contributors to her success. For her, one of these is differentiation: “We still make the mistake of not wanting to teach as much in certain classes as in others. We have to realize that maybe it’s not about quantity, it’s just different. It would be easier not to differentiate, of course, but one cannot teach the same thing to all the classes in the same way.” Based on the results, it seems that more participants linked success to personal characteristics and skills/abilities than to the amount of work invested in teaching, although some interviewees thought both were needed. Some others still, questioned the dichotomous differentiation between success and failure. This idea expands on classic attributional theories, in which the explanation of success and failure is provided in parallel models without operationalizing their dynamic interplay how, for example, experiences from failures can feed into subsequent successes (Graham, 1999; Ushioda, 2001; Weiner, 1984, 1992). It is difficult to disagree with the teachers who argue that one can learn from one’s failures; those failures will take people forward.

4.5.3.2

Explaining Failures

Talking about failures is not easy, and, as a matter of fact, this was no exception for my interviewees or for me. Dispositions toward failures are well illustrated by the oxymorononical comment of Anna: “Naturally, failures are totally accepted, but it is difficult to accept them.” She knew that failures and breakdowns were part and parcel of her job, but this does not mean that it is easy to cope with them. András, who teaches English, mostly one-to-one, in a corporate setting, experiences failures when he has to teach people whose self-confidence is extremely low. He explained that it was very difficult to teach people like that and that he was unwilling to invest energy in working with this side of their personality as well as teaching them English. Another instance which he experienced as a failure was in the 1990s, when employing native-speaker teachers in corporate settings was popular: “It was really disappointing to see that some of my own students started to take classes taught by native English teacher in secret.” Later though, this failure turned into success when some of his former students rejoined his classes realizing that being taught by native-speaker teachers were not always synonymous with effective teaching (cf. Medgyes, 2017a). It is indicative how András concluded these thoughts: “I don’t really have experiences with failures. I do everything I can to avoid them. If I were fired from my job, that would be a real failure.” András does not explain failures; he tries to avoid them. Failures are very similar for Anna, who is self-employed in the private sector and does most of her teaching in one-to-one settings, especially, when she cannot communicate with a student, and as a result, they look for a new private teacher. She finds it very difficult to process this even though she probably knows that if this happens it is maybe for the best. Concerning personal communication, she concludes: “I’ve thought about this a lot, what I should do differently, but the

86

4 Teacher Motivation in Hungary

bottom line is that you cannot communicate with everyone effectively, you cannot find a common ground with everyone.” It seems, yet again, that there could be a marked difference between those working in the private and those working in the state (school) sector, maybe due to the fact that in state schools failures are more difficult to avoid than in the private sector. According to Barbara “you always have to deal with failure”, often in a particular group she is teaching: “If I give them a task or a topic that has the potential to generate good discussion and it doesn’t, and the conversation doesn’t flow, then I start thinking whether my questions are suitable or I should change them. Sometimes though, I tend to blame the group for being too shy.” This quote clearly illustrates the dual nature of failure within the interactional process of teaching and learning. Barbara is not only thinking about what she could do better, but she understands that she cannot be successful without the cooperation of her students. Nevertheless, there are times when she knows she could do better but she cannot concentrate on teaching due to personal problems. Cili, who works at a university, views cooperation as something between the group members and between the students and their teacher: you must have cooperation in order to succeed. These are precisely some of the issues that have been investigated in student-related studies on group dynamics (see Sect. 3.2.5). Some further examples of Cili’s failures include: failing to prepare for classes, the group is unwilling to work, or in spite of everyone making an effort, the lessons do not work. The worst-case scenario for her is when failure does not relate to a single lesson but drags on: “Sometimes that I cannot work with a particular group for some reason. Luckily, this happens very rarely.” Balázs usually links failure to having less successful lessons: “Very often, I realize that it’s not up to me and I still feel that I could’ve done something different.” His quote can be related to the effort teachers make which sometimes do not lead to success, nevertheless, when the lessons break down they are considered to be the teachers’ responsibility. As Balázs explains: “You always have to find the source of failure and most often it is the teacher, which means I’m the one responsible.” As a last resort, he can make his class quiet: “Sometimes I play tough and ask them to be quiet, but I know that this is not the solution.” Dalma told me that she also tried to take responsibility for any failures with her special needs students: “Generally, I try to find what I did wrong […] I always think about what I did wrong and what I can do better next time.” Emese thinks hard about how to explain her failures which she calls “disappointments.” She knows what a good lesson, a teacher, or a task should be in a given situation, but often things work out differently: “Sometimes things don’t work out because of purely personal reasons. And to me, this is the saddest thing of all.” Sometimes failure is due to her own lack of effort: “I fail to prepare for a lesson, or I don’t prepare the way I should, or I know what students should learn but I cannot accomplish it. Some other times, it is down to external forces, like having too many cancelled classes due to various national holidays or long weekends.” According to Emese, when lessons go astray, the most important thing is to remain aware of (“be consciously present”) and regularly reflect on what is happening in the classroom:

4.5 The Main Results of the Interview Study

87

“I need to be better next semester. I need to reconstruct myself, my teacher self, so that I can meet expectations and learn from my mistakes.” Just like her experiences of success, Fanni’s failures can be linked to her personal characteristics and to those of her groups. A balance between a teacher and her students can mean success (see above) and an imbalance can lead to failures: “Because I’m very dynamic and energetic, it goes without saying that I am good at energizing quiet groups. But with hyperactive groups, I just make them even more active, which is not good. I had to quit teaching a particular group in the past. That was an experience of failure.” She reasoned that this particular group had needed a calmer teacher: “They needed a type of discipline that could only be established by keeping the distance from them. I could have done this, but not without damaging rapport with the group. It took maximum effort on my part to achieve things in the lessons; every lesson was really difficult. I often felt that I couldn’t control them. I wouldn’t say it was total chaos, but I couldn’t keep up with the work and produce the results I might have achieved with a calmer group.” At the end of the school year, she asked the head of school to switch teachers for this particular group. Her final comment, pertaining to how achievement and rapport with a group are interrelated for her, was: “This is what I find difficult with groups, when you cannot use humor or relax because they need strict rules and a teacher who is always serious. This is very unlike me; this is not my personality. With groups like these, I cannot be successful.” Hajni was less detailed but she also relate her failures to her relationships with her students. The difficulty stems from the fact that in order to gain students’ trust you have to let them get close to you. However, once you have built this trust, it is hard to keep the distance you need to teach effectively. For Gréta the central element of failure is failing to differentiate among her students and among her groups. The notion of differentiation seems to be especially difficult for Hungarian L2 teachers (Illés & Csizér, 2018) and many of them would welcome further training on this. Breakdowns and failures are inevitably part of the teaching experience as the same levels of success cannot be achieved with each student or group of students. However, it does not mean that it is easy to accept failures. It seems important to reflect on what went well and not so well in lessons and only take responsibility for issues that are truly the responsibility of teachers. These data show that the most often experienced failures are strongly linked to having poor rapport with students. This could be directly linked to the characteristics of classroom teaching and long periods of time spent with different groups in primary and secondary education (see also Dörnyei, 2001b; Dörnyei & Csizér, 1998 about the importance of rapport in motivating students).

4.5.4 Professional Goals In terms of motivation, it is revealing to see what kind of professional goals participants set for themselves. Both András and Balázs explained the importance of having professional goals. As András was teaching in two different contexts at the time of

88

4 Teacher Motivation in Hungary

the interview, it was difficult for him to choose one particular goal: “I think a lot about what I should do next. In the corporate world, there are always new opportunities, new priorities, and new things to be learnt and new directions to move toward. But there’s academia as well which has no borders. I’ll need to see how things develop.” In a similar vein, Balázs emphasized the importance of continuous professional development in both teaching and other professional projects. “What’s interesting is that I’ve realized that I’m just as busy planning Wednesday morning classes as I was 15 years ago.” He added that the more experienced he was, the more he prepared for classes. In terms of professional projects, he said: “There’s always a project I undertake on my own. The book I write must be the way I want it to be. The goal is to always to keep having goals. And the main goal is to have goals in the long run.” For many participants, professional goals are closely linked to developing as a person not just as a teacher. In order to remain successful in the private sector, one needs to keep learning new things. Anna explained that earlier she had attended courses on time management and conflict resolution. “I attended these courses because I don’t think it’s enough to learn the present perfect, but very often I see that there are issues with time management or dealing with problems. It would be great if my lessons were more complex.” Barbara has similar goals with personal development. “I definitely want to do it better because I don’t think that I’m a born teacher, and I think I have to improve. I try to think about what I did wrong and what I would do differently next time. Now I’m really interested in assessment and autonomy.” Dalma would like to obtain her teaching degree and her longtime goal is to set up a private language school for special needs students. Emese explained that her goal was to always become a little better at what she did. She had been doing her PhD at the time of the interview. She commented: “I have to change my disposition toward academia [i.e., life as a researcher] I don’t think I can avoid it; I find myself in situations where I need to develop professionally. No matter how much I try to resist it, it feels good to be moving in this direction. I can conquer these challenges.” Her motivation for development stems from thinking that “I’ll go crazy if I have to do the same thing twice.” Cili’s professional goals were related to her students. Her goal at the time of the interview was to help them develop their learning autonomy. As there are a fixed number of hours per week spent in the classroom, those students who use English outside the classroom in a way that promotes their language development can be successful in the long run. Cili thinks it is not enough to tell them to “watch television series”, but she tries to provide students with digital content to improve their language skills outside the classroom: “They often say that the current generation is a digital generation, but I disagree. My goal is for them to get to know the tools and methods they are not familiar with.” To achieve this goal, she has formed a group with her colleagues who conduct research and develop educational tools and programs for their students. A similar view was expressed by Fanni and Gréta, whose professional goals were connected to the progress of their students. As Fanni’s quote illustrates: “The professional goal is for all students to perform at the highest level. Really, everyone” (Fanni).

4.5 The Main Results of the Interview Study

89

Based on these data, there appear to be two main emerging issues related to professional goals. One such theme relates to the participants’ own personal skills and abilities they think they need developing: obtaining PhDs, learning new things, and generally becoming a better teacher. The other group of professional is relational, and it is aimed at students getting better at learning, getting to know and using a foreign language. The professional goal is to make the learning process as successful as possible for students. Linking back these results to Norton identity research (e.g., Stranger-Johannessen & Norton, 2017), it seems that there is a relational level to teacher identity in the sense that it is impacted by students’ needs and achievements.

4.5.5 Summary In this part of my study, I have sought to answer two specific research questions. (1) How do English teachers describe their language learning and teaching experiences? (2) What opinions do they express about L2 motivation? The emerging themes touched on a wide range of issues and showed that opinions about these concepts are expressed in a complex way. In terms of experiences, it seems that learning experiences were recalled more vividly and, in more detail, than experiences related to teacher training. The core concept of the recalled experiences was success as an experience. All the teachers in my sample started out as highly successful language learners and this became decisive for them in the long run. Another seemingly important theme is related to participants’ contact experiences, but this theme emerged mainly in relation to language proficiency. Studying experience-related topics pertaining to L2 motivation still remains an important research niche (Csizér & Kálmán, 2019a, 2019b). Establishing a coherent framework seems impossible since the themes that arose were wide-ranging. Thus, constructing a grounded theory does not seem feasible at this point. As no radically new perspectives on motivation have emerged, these results are more likely to give voices to and examples of earlier theorizations of L2 motivation. Important aspects include choice motivation and L2 motivation in teacher education, changes in self-related concepts as one’s career progresses as well as the interrelated and interactional nature of motivation as it is socially constructed between teachers and students. At this point it is clear that additional theoretical considerations should be offered to provide a framework for future research on foreign language teachers’ motivation in Hungary (for further details see Chapter 5).

90

4 Teacher Motivation in Hungary

4.6 The Main Results of the Questionnaire Study 4.6.1 Motivational Scales When setting out to measure English teachers’ motivation in a quantitative paradigm, 11 latent dimensions were measured as detailed in Sect. 4.4.6. Table 4.4 includes the internal reliability analysis of these scales as well as their descriptive statistics. Despite the fact that Cronbach’s alpha values show satisfactory internal reliability as all values are higher than 0.7 (Dörnyei, 2007b), and therefore, none of the scales should be discarded from further analyses, I have to point out that these results do not prove the discriminant validity of these groups of scales. However, as the present study was designed to be an exploratory investigation, no factor analysis was performed. In terms of the descriptive statistics (Table 4.4), let me begin the analysis with the two dependent scales: motivated teaching behavior and motivated professional development. English teachers score high on both scales, although there are two interesting facts to consider. First, based on paired-sample t-test, participants’ dispositions are significantly higher for motivated professional development (t = 10.276, p < 0.05) even though the standard deviation value of the motivated teaching behavior scale is much higher. This indicates that the lower mean value should be associated with higher disagreement among the participants. The results indicating that their motivated professional development value is higher may draw our attention to a number of issues that would require further research: (1) the fact that Hungarian teachers can obtain higher salary levels by performing certain professional tasks might be reflected by the higher value; (2) motivated teaching behavior might be associated with classroom work that could have demotivating instances, which this study did Table 4.4 Cronbach’s alpha values and descriptive statistics Scales

Cronbach’s alpha

Mean

St. dev.

Motivated teaching behavior

0.79

3.79

0.73

Motivated professional development

0.85

4.25

0.56

Affective attitudes toward teaching

0.87

4.40

0.60

Cognitive attitudes toward teaching

0.88

4.42

0.70

Successful teacher self

0.87

4.20

0.57

Self-reflection

0.84

4.13

0.57

Foreign language learning experiences

0.74

3.48

0.81

Foreign language teaching experiences

0.75

4.41

0.54

Experiencing students’ successes

0.79

4.44

0.51

Experiencing professional development

0.71

4.04

0.68

Self-confidence

0.74

4.44

0.55

4.6 The Main Results of the Questionnaire Study

91

not measure; (3) data was collected in the second term of the school year when maintaining one’s teaching motivation might be more difficult due to stress and fatigue (Szrogh, 2020; Szrogh & Csizér, in press). In terms of the independent scales, five show the highest mean value: selfconfidence, experiencing students’ successes, foreign language teaching experiences, and cognitive and affective attitudes for teaching. Although high mean values do not automatically indicate a significant impact, it is important to point out that highly positive dispositions were found in the scales that were important in previous studentrelated studies as well; such as attitude-related scales (Gardner, 1985, 2006) selfconfidence (see Sect. 2.4) as well as the possible importance of experience-related issues in motivation (Csizér & Kálmán, 2019a, 2019b). The lowest mean value was obtained by foreign language learning experiences, indicating that previous studies about negative learning experiences of unsuccessful learners cannot be ignored in Hungary (Nikolov, 2001).

4.6.2 Demotivation The questionnaire measured 18 possible issues that can demotivate teachers. Table 4.5 contains the descriptive results of these items. Using paired-sample t-test, I compared the mean values of each item and established a rank-order of the demotivational items. The most demotivating issue proved to be those of language-related differences within the learning groups with a mean value close to 3.6, indicating a medium level of demotivation on a five-point scale. Researching the opinions of language teachers seems to be an evergreen topic (Öveges & Csizér, 2018; Öveges & Kuti, 2016). It seems that teachers are not equipped with skills to differentiate among students within the same group. This may be the absence of training in this area, or to the preferred way of frontal teaching that cannot usually cater for individualized learning. The second most demotivating issue was having a low salary. I do not think this needs much explanation; underpaid teachers are not strictly a Hungarian characteristic. What is interesting though is that the factor analytical results showed that low pay as a demotivational issue falls into the same dimension as having a large number of contact hours, having to spend too long on lesson preparation and having to cope with high levels of stress. This indicates that the problem lies in the disproportion between the workload and the level of pay (Csizér, 2020; Appendix F). The third most demotivating issue proved to be not having sufficient teaching equipment at schools. The least demotivating notions are career and assessment-related items as well as responsibility, course books, the repetitive nature of teaching and insufficient opportunities for professional development. Based on descriptive statistics, one can obtain a general sense of the participants’ dispositions toward the various scales, but we cannot know for certain what percentage of the participants actually experience demotivational instances. In order to gain some understanding of this, I ran cluster analysis on the dataset, including the scales, created on the basis of the factor analysis (Appendix F), as clustering

92

4 Teacher Motivation in Hungary

Table 4.5 Descriptive statistics of possible aspects of demotivation Possible aspects of demotivation

Mean

St. dev.

Difference in FL knowledge in the groupa

3.58

1.22

Low salaryb

3.38

1.30

Lack of teaching equipment at schoolc

3.10

1.37

Too large groupsc

3.09

1.45

Work-related stressc

3.08

1.28

Teaching-related administrative tasksc

3.07

1.23

Lower than expected student achievementsc

3.04

1.17

High contact hoursc

2.99

1.58

Lack of progress in my careerd

2.54

1.35

Lack of autonomy in making teaching-related decisionsd

2.53

1.35

Requirements of the curriculad

2.47

1.18

Preparing for classesd

2.46

1.20

Assessment of studentsd

2.39

1.14

Responsibility related to my worke

2.34

1.22

The course book I must usee

2.25

1.22

Keeping contact with parentse

2.16

1.29

That I have to teach the same things each yeare

2.13

1.20

That I feel I cannot develop professionallye

2.12

1.19

Note The lower indexes (a–e ) indicate significant differences (different indexes) or non-significant differences (same indexes)

variables. The four clustering variables measured different aspects of motivation including (1) problems with the general framework of teaching, such as a centrally defined curriculum and course book; (2) issues related to taking responsibilities for one’s own teaching, such as student assessment; (3) imbalance in workload and income: too much work for too little money; (4) a lack of school resources leading to having large, heterogeneous groups. As for the results of cluster analysis, Table 4.6 Table 4.6 The results of the cluster analysis and the size of the cluster groups Demotivation scales

Cluster centers with mean valuesa Cluster 1

Cluster 2

Cluster 3

Size of the clusters

n = 64 (32.7%)

n = 73 (37.2%)

n = 59 (30.1%)

Framework of teaching

3.20

1.66

2.19

Taking responsibilities

3.38

1.68

2.03

Lack of work/income balance

3.22

2.20

3.65

Lack of resources

3.78

2.19

3.98

a Five-point

scales

4.6 The Main Results of the Questionnaire Study

93

contains the results relating to various levels of motivation/demotivation. It appears that a little more than a third of the participants (37.2%) had no experience of demotivation at the time of data collection, as they scored lowest on the demotivational scales. The remaining almost two-thirds were either partially demotivated (Cluster 3) as they scored extremely high on two scales (lack of work/income balance and lack of resources) but not so high on the other scales; or they could be considered to be generally demotivated as they scored higher than the mid-point on all demotivational scales (Cluster 1). Even if we take into account the fact that data collection happened toward the end of the school year when teachers were already more tired, it is revealing that the highest mean values were obtained by the scale measuring school resources. The absence of school resources as well as having large and heterogeneous groups have emerged as possible problems in other Hungarian studies both in the 1990s and recently (cf. Dörnyei, 1998b; Illés & Csizér, 2018) which indicate that some things are notoriously difficult to change. Having inadequate school facilities as well as problems with groups also appeared in studies of demotivation (see Sect. 3.6). Demotivation had also emerged during the interview research detailed above, and some participants explained the importance of recognizing demotivating influences and the need to consciously re-motivating oneself. The majority of teachers in the sample seem to need this skill.

4.6.3 The Relationships Among the Scales To explore the relationships among the scales, correlational analyses were performed to determine the extent to which the various scales are related to each other. This analysis does not refer to the types of causation, so all the results presented here should only be interpreted as a description on the strengths of the relationships between the two scales. The results are analyzed from several perspectives: the strongest relations are described first, then the number of significant relationships is considered, finally, the non-significant relations are discussed. Table 4.7 presents the results of the analysis. One pair of correlation seems to be exceptionally high (r > 0.8), that is between the affective attitudes to teaching and motivated professional development. Correlations between the 0.7 and 0.8 range include two relations with self-reflection (motivated professional development and affective attitudes toward language teaching) and foreign language teaching experiences as well as successful teacher self. These correlations point to an interesting issue: How the affective and cognitive notions relate to one another in complex ways, and how experiences are linked to self-related issues. These results confirm the importance of social psychological processes in L2 motivation and the role of attitudes (e.g., Gardner, 2019). The central significance of the scales is illustrated by the number of strong correlations with the other scales. Five of the 11 scales show strong correlations with all other scales: cognitive and emotional teaching attitudes, self-reflection and selfconfidence, and experience of student success. These results bode well with earlier

0.530** 0.321** 0.428** 0.503** 0.081 0.415** 0.444** 0.559** 0.391**

0.527** 0.816** 0.484** 0.632** 0.708** 0.084 0.673** 0.626** 0.579** 0.592**

3. Attitudes toward teaching: affective

4. Attitudes toward teaching: cognitive

5. Successful teacher self

6. Self-reflection

7. Foreign language learning experience

8. Foreign language teaching experiences experience

9. Experiencing student success

10. Experiencing professional development

11. Self-confidence

*Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed)

1

1

2

2. Motivated teaching behavior

1

1. Motivated professional development

Table 4.7 Correlation results among the scales

0.615**

0.712**

0.687** 0.368**

0.467**

0.630**

0.447**

0.176*

0.196** 0.644**

0.571**

0.385**

1

4

0.757**

0.627**

0.575**

1

3

0.643**

0.402**

0.655**

0.762**

–

0.490**

1

5

0.553**

0.656**

0.627**

0.541**

0.246**

1

6

0.173*

0.122

0.175*

0.068

1

7

0.667**

0.385**

0.629**

1

8

0.542**

0.550**

1

9

0.392**

1

10

1

11

94 4 Teacher Motivation in Hungary

4.6 The Main Results of the Questionnaire Study

95

L2 motivation research indicating that attitudes, self-related notions and various variables related to experience play a vital role in L2 motivation (Dörnyei, 2019b; Lamb et al., 2019). It seems to be true not only for foreign language students but also for foreign language teachers. I do not think it would be wise to calculate the mean values of the correlation co-efficients, but it seems that correlations related to affective attitudes tend to be higher than all other correlations. This indicates that enjoying one’s job as a foreign language teacher surpasses all other variables in motivation. However, these results should be considered carefully, as no causal conclusions can be drawn about the relations between the scales. To map the possible impact of the independent scales on the dependent ones, regression analyses were performed separately for the two dependent scales: motivated teaching behavior and motivated professional development (Tables 4.8 and 4.9). In terms of the scales impacting motivated professional development, four seemed to have a direct impact: affective attitudes toward teaching, foreign language teaching experiences, self-reflection and foreign language learning experiences (the latter with negative beta). As for motivated teaching behavior, the following had a significant positive effect in the equation: experiencing professional success, successful teacher self and self-reflection. Based on these results, a number of issues should be raised. Table 4.8 Results of the regression analysis of the attitudinal and motivational scales with motivated professional development as the criterion scale Final model Scales

B

SE B

β

Attitudes toward teaching: affective

0.502

0.061

0.537**

Foreign language teaching experiences

0.236

0.053

0.235**

Self-reflection

0.200

0.059

0.201**

−0.060

0.027

Foreign language learning experiences R2

0.724

F for change in R2

4.796*

−0.086*

**p < 0.01,*p < 0.05

Table 4.9 Results of the regression analysis of the attitudinal and motivational scales with motivated teaching behavior as the criterion scale Final model Scales

B

SE B

β

Experiencing professional success

0.398

0.081

0.373**

Successful teacher self

0.253

0.084

0.199**

Self-reflection

0.207

0.103

0.161*

R2

0.374

F for change in R2

4.026*

**p < 0.01, *p < 0.05

96

4 Teacher Motivation in Hungary

First, only one scale has a positive effect on both dependent scales, i.e., self-reflection. Although the notion of self-reflection is considered to be of paramount importance in the teaching profession in many respects (Freeman & Richards, 1996), its direct relationship to the motivational processes has not been explored in great detail. This may be because in the past, L2 motivational studies have focused primarily on student motivation and the impact of teachers on student motivation rather than on teacher motivation. Second, despite a significant correlation between the two dependent scales (r = 0.527), they are mostly impacted by different scales in the equations, showing the complex nature of L2 motivation. Third, it may seem contraintuitive that motivated professional development is more closely related to affective scales, while the scale of motivated teaching behavior is to professional success and successful selves. However, this possibly points to the fact that teacher motivation is a complex construct and both its cognitive and affective bases should be considered. Affective attitudes fuel the need for professional development that feed into having more positive experiences that shape selves and teaching behavior in the end. When the two regression models are compared (Tables 4.8 and 4.9), it becomes evident that the explanatory power (i.e., the value of the R2 ) is considerably higher for the model in which motivated professional development is the criterion scale. At this point only a hypothetical explanation can be offered to explain this phenomenon. Motivated teaching behavior may be more strongly influenced by contextual variables related to classroom and group-relevant process, which have not been measured in this study. Several interesting results have surfaced when the reviewed theoretical and empirical research in Chapter 2 was compared to the data above. First, attitudes have long been shown to contribute to L2 motivation and shape the learning process (Gardner, 1985, 2006, 2019). Based on my results, however, it is important to differentiate between affective and cognitive attitudes, in other words, separate cognition and emotions in L2 motivation research. In the present context, the impact of affective attitudes tends to surpass that of the cognitive ones, but this result needs to be considered with caution and further studies are needed to map the role of different types of attitudes in L2 motivation. Second, Dörnyei’s inclusion of self-related notions in L2 motivation research through his L2 Motivational Self System (2005, 2009b) as well as previous research on teachers’ selves by Kubanyiova (2015) and Hiver (2013) are corroborated by the results of this study in that successful teacher self was proved to be an important antecedent scale to L2 motivation. This indicates that, as measured by Sahakyan et al. (2018), not only the ideal and ought to selves or feasible selves should be considered, but also the satisfaction with the teacher’s current self should be measured and taken into account when researching teacher motivation. Third, Dörnyei’s L2 Motivational Self System (2005, 2009b) also suggested the presence and impact of a contextual variable in relation to experiences. Both teaching experiences and, in particular, experiencing professional success were found to be significant contributors to teacher motivation, which clearly indicates the importance of this variable. As far as teacher motivation is concerned, it seems important to take into account a number of different experiences in teaching and learning (the latter being unfortunately negative in this context) to describe teacher motivation to the

4.6 The Main Results of the Questionnaire Study

97

fullest extent. In addition, despite the initial confusion of labelling the contextual variable either attitudes or experiences in the L2 Motivational Self System (Kormos & Csizér, 2008; You, Dörnyei, & Csizér, 2016), it seems that this is not an ‘either-or’ problem, but both notions need to be operationalized and taken into account when researching teacher motivation.

4.6.4 Summary In summarizing the results of the quantitative phase of this study, it should be emphasized that this is the first time I have attempted to measure the motivational processes of English teachers in Hungary. Consequently, the results may contain researcher bias as the issues I investigated were important from my perspective. One of the main outcomes is the dual conceptualization of teacher motivation. This was achieved by exploring motivation to teach as well as motivation to develop professional knowledge. This duality was not only substantiated by the dimension reduction procedure but also by the fact that the results of the regression analysis show distinct patterns. In general, I can conclude that the motivation of English teachers is affected by attitudes, experiences and self-related issues. Only self-reflection is the common ground for both constructs. The findings are thought-provoking in that professional development is influenced by affective attitudes to teaching, meaning that it is the love for the job that helps teachers develop professionally rather than cognitive variables. In addition, this development is rooted in their teaching experiences and former learning experiences. The fact that the latter is a negative experience adds to the growing body of research about quality control issues in foreign language education in Hungary (Nikolov, 2001; Öveges & Csizér, 2018). At this point, I must reiterate that both parts of this study about the motivational processes of English teachers in Hungary were exploratory in nature. New data need to be collected to test and confirm the relationships. To do this, a new theoretical framework should be developed that adequately addresses the attitudinal, experience, and self-related issues for foreign/second language teachers.

Chapter 5

Conclusion and Further Research Directions

In the final chapter of my monograph, I would like to present possible future research directions in relation to teachers’ L2 motivation research based on the conclusions from the earlier chapters. I will discuss possible theoretical research as well as research involving students and/or teachers as well as their interactions. In order to provide useful methods to investigate L2 teacher motivation, different research paradigms are considered and novelty in L2 motivation is touched upon.

5.1 Toward a Theoretical Model of Language Teacher Motivation When I summarized L2 motivational theories in Chapter 2, one thing became especially evident: Motivation is considered a personal characteristic in the models discussed. Most theories conceptualized and discussed motivation as students’ effort invested in language learning and as such, it was considered largely as a decontextualized individual variable (Crookes & Schmidt, 1991). Even when contextual issues were considered, they were only viewed from the angle of how they had impacted students, and not in an interactional or relational way but as a stable trait (Csizér & Albert, in press). Growing dissatisfaction with student motivation being explored in isolation has led to some empirical advancements using multivariate statistical analysis or intricate qualitative methods. They managed to move away from the classic cross-sectional survey methods and included various context-sensitive approaches to motivation (e.g., Dörnyei’s retrospective modelling; Ushioda’s small lens approach; Henry, Sundqvist, & Thorsen, 2019). In the Hungarian classroom setting, some important considerations have surfaced that may contribute to the development of an L2 teacher motivation model that is both context-sensitive and operationalizes motivation as an interactional or relational construct. In this sense, language learning and, in particular, classroom learning © Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020 K. Csizér, Second Language Learning Motivation in a European Context: The Case of Hungary, Second Language Learning and Teaching, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-64462-8_5

99

100

5 Conclusion and Further Research Directions

should not be seen as an individual enterprise but an interactional process (i.e., in which context not only provides a background to the study but becomes an integral part of the investigation, as the example of The Douglas Fir Model (2016) for learning shows). To measure motivation as an interaction, we need theories to acknowledge this fact. Second, as classrooms provide a finite context both in space and time, even if they provide an infinite number and variety of interaction, motivation to use the language rather than to learn it will result in long-term student engagement. Hence, in future theories of L2 motivation, language learners, despite the moniker, should be not considered as learners but as users of the language. L2 motivation to use a foreign language should be considered both within and outside the classroom setting. This means that language use should be considered outside the classroom but, on other hand, the classroom as a venue of genuine communication should be viewed (Illés & Akcan, 2017). The third issue is the L2 part of L2 motivation. In our globalized world, I do not think that we can talk about second or foreign language learning motivation without giving a thought to English as a lingua franca. As I summarized in Chapter 2, it has become evident that the notion of integrativeness should be meaningfully re-conceptualized into a broad concept, describing general identification with the language and its speakers, regardless whether they are native or non-native. The need to consider English as a lingua franca (ELF) indicates that the language level of motivation (cf. Dörnyei, 1994) should be further refined. ELF is defined as a language used “among speakers of different first languages for whom English is the communicative medium of choice, and often the only option” (Seidlhofer, 2011, p. 7). The motivational effects of ELF is presented in Henry, Sundqvist and Thorsen (2019), who argue that ELF provide an important aspect of student identity and “understanding how students respond to the English that they meet in school requires an understanding of how English is involved in leisure time social practices upon which the imprint of globalization is becoming increasingly visible” (p. 24). Apart from understanding the increasingly globalized identities and subsequent identification processes (see Illés & Csizér, 2010 and their instrument in Appendix 7), it is also important to grasp the communication challenges ELF poses for users of English in today’s world. Some challenges include the amount of shared knowledge between interlocutors, the necessity of increased negotiation of meaning and the diversity of ELF users and context (Csizér & Illés, 2020). This suggests that successful users of English should be open and tolerant to diversity and should be able to use a variety of accommodation skills. More importantly, one must remember that ELF users are bilingual, and often multilingual speakers by definition, and they can draw on their “multi-faceted multilingual repertoires in a fashion motivated by the communicative purpose and the interpersonal dynamics of the interaction” (Seidlhofer, 2009, p. 242). Therefore, the language level of motivational models should consider the multilingual reality that the majority of students live in. In addition, the use of English as a lingua franca relates to a number of self-related issues when motivation is considered. For example, self-confidence and self-efficacy are paramount because when learners leave the classroom and engage in communication in English, which will be most likely with other non-native speakers (Illés, 2020), they need to be confident enough to cope with such challenges (Csizér & Illés, 2020).

5.1 Toward a Theoretical Model of Language Teacher Motivation

101

Another issue directly relating to the language level of motivation is the motivation to learn languages other than English (LOTE) (for a summary of theoretical and empirical papers see The Modern Language Journal special issue, Dörnyei & AlHoorie, 2017; Ushioda & Dörnyei, 2017). Several studies investigating plurilingual learners of English and other L3s have identified negative influences of English in various European contexts, where students learn multiple languages in formal education (Eurobarometer, 2012), such as Germany (Lanvers & Chambers, 2019) or Sweden (Henry, 2010, 2011, 2014; Henry & Cliffordson, 2013). In the Hungarian context, we found that students who learnt English and German simultaneously but in a different order, i.e., English/German as L2 or L3, displayed different motivation profiles. Students who started learning English first and later on added German as an L3 did not have any negative interferences in their motivational profiles (Csizér & Lukács, 2010). The results indicate a preferred order to learning L2s where the globally important English precedes the regionally relevant German. It has convincingly been argued in recent years that a shift in L2 motivation research is needed (Ushioda, 2017), where focus is directed to developing learners’ ideal multilingual selves. As Henry (2017) points out an ideal multilingual self can emerge as a product of positive interactions between the self-guides of the different languages that the individual knows or is learning. Henry and Thorsen (2019) proved that the ideal multilingual self could have a positive influence on the ideal L2 self, and, in turn, could have a distinct function in generating effort in learning a LOTE. This shift in research needs to be reflected in theoretical considerations. It may be achieved by extending the boundaries of L2 Motivation Self System (Dörnyei, 2005, 2009b) but also by reflecting on the role of the teacher as well as other L2 motivation theories by explicitly including multilingual and interactional aspects into L2 motivation theories. The above considerations in the classroom context highlight the role of teachers in “developing knowledge about how English influences, shapes and conditions they ways in which young people see themselves as individuals in a globalized world” (Henry, Sundqvist, & Thorsen, 2019, p. 24). The role of the L2 motivation researcher is to provide a theoretical framework to research L2 motivation in an ELF sensitive way including LOTEs in various non-native contexts (e.g., in Hungary) as well as to consider new multilingual pedagogies (Henry, 2014), while regarding the challenges of conceptualizing motivation outlined by Dörnyei (2020) in a number of dichotomies, such as state/trait, affect/cognition, conscious/unconscious. The need to move away from monolingual teaching and monolingual pedagogy appears in many guises in applied linguistics and it is not a new phenomenon. A monolingual view is in stark contrast with the bilingual (or trilingual) reality of language learning (Widdowson, 2003). Widdowson has long been advocating the need to take into account students’ first languages when teaching them English or other second languages. This advocacy for bilingual pedagogy can also be supported by L2 motivation research. Most notably, Henry (2014) has argued for considering student’s selves related to various languages, which necessitates moving away from the L2 Motivational Self System to Multiple language selves. But when multiple languages, selves and contexts are scrutinized, one cannot disregard the interactional

102

5 Conclusion and Further Research Directions

processes in these notions. Interaction of selves and identities, interaction of teachers and students as well as interaction of language users should inform future language learning theories.

5.1.1 The Need for Further Interactional Studies on Motivation Based on the above, it is clear that further interactional research is needed on L2 (or multilingual) motivation. But before discussing possible future research directions in studying the interrelationship of student and teacher motivation, I will provide separate summaries for student- and teacher-focused research to identify possible research gaps.

5.1.1.1

Gaps in Student-Focused Motivation Research

When summarizing student-related research in Hungary, several research gaps could be identified. Although my focus is on one particular context, these ideas can be transferred to other contexts as well. – In contexts where students are learning multiple languages, it is important to conduct systematic studies on how initial choice motivation affects long-term engagement and motivation. In Hungary, it would be important to investigate motivational dispositions toward the learning and teaching of German and English and outline ways to motivate students of LOTEs. As schools cannot always meet the initial demands of learners to learn particular foreign languages, it is important to inform teachers how to motivate LOTEs students. Furthermore, we do not know how much the quality of instruction differs in various foreign language classrooms, and hardly any systematic comparative data exists on the motivation of teachers of various languages (cf. Szrogh & Csizér, in press). Finally, motivational influences are needed to be identified that can counteract the negative impact of various languages in the learning process. – Relationships among individual difference variables: Motivation as a variable should be researched in concert with other important individual difference variables. In the Hungarian setting, students tend to rely heavily on teacher input, so it would be important to further our understanding of the relationship between motivation and autonomy (Asztalos, Szénich & Csizér, 2020), especially in light of English as a lingua franca (Csizér & Illés, 2020). It would be important to map if circular relationships may exist between these two important variables and what some of the mediating variables are. I am aware that circular relationships are notoriously difficult to investigate but both qualitative studies and structural equation modelling could provide some possible ways to explore and prove complex relationships.

5.1 Toward a Theoretical Model of Language Teacher Motivation

103

– Another important group of variables in individual differences is emotions and their positive and negative impact on motivation should be explored. This seems to be especially important because despite the fact the motivation is often labeled as an ‘affective’ variable, in reality, emotional issues are largely missing from L2 motivation research (Dörnyei, 2009b, 2019b). Initial Hungarian studies investigated the role of anxiety for advanced-level learners (Piniel, 2006, 2010; Tóth, 2010), but it would be useful to see how other negative and positive emotions manifest themselves among learners just starting to learn a language and how the impact of emotions might change over time as learners progress. Both retrospective interview studies and large-scale cross-sectional studies including learners of different ages and language levels could contribute to our understanding of how affective issues relate to students’ motivational dispositions. – Classroom learning cannot disregard the motivational impact of group-related processes. Based on the recent summary of Fukada and colleagues (Fukada, Falout, Fukuda & Murphey, 2019) several issues should be considered in the future investigation of group dynamical processes. As its name suggests, these processes are to be investigated using longitudinal designs. In order to draw generalizable results, these studies should collect data from large-enough samples that allow for multivariate statistical analyses. In addition, it would also be important to conduct ethnographic qualitative studies to arrive at a more nuanced picture of motivational processes (e.g., Henry, Sundqvist, & Thorsen, 2019). From the students’ viewpoint, it would be especially important to investigate the differences between group processes and students’ perception of these processes. In addition, a vast array of variables should be mapped to see how different aspects of group dynamics affect motivation either in positive or negative ways. – Besides emotions, the role of various cognitive variables should be considered. Following Ryan’s footsteps (2019), who pointed out the necessity of investigating various individual variables in concert, it would be beneficial to map the interrelationships of various cognitive variables with L2 motivation, especially their roles in learning in classroom setting. Data pertaining to classroom activities should also be updated in the Hungarian context, to see the extent of the various classroom tasks contributing to students’ motivation (Nikolov, 2003, 2008). – Demotivational and remotivational processes within the classroom context may be investigated from multiple perspectives. We have information on how students see these issues and the ways they perceive teachers’ roles in both demotivation and remotivation. We also have some quantitative information on what teachers think of the crucial issues contributing to demotivation such as group sizes and the fact that in most groups, students’ language levels are always somewhat heterogeneous. What is missing from the research palette is a qualitative investigation on teachers’ perspectives coupled with observational studies. It would be interesting to see teachers’ views on demotivation and remotivation: How they perceive student demotivation and possible ways of remotivating them and how far students’ views align with these beliefs. – Finally, I think it would be important to investigate L2 motivation in a dynamic way within the paradigm of attribution theory. We still have very little data on

104

5 Conclusion and Further Research Directions

how successes and failures in learning contribute/hinder motivation. Positioning attributional explanations within learners’ experiences learning various foreign languages could possibly reveal further ways of successfully motivate them. 5.1.1.2

Further Research into Teacher Motivation

As there are markedly fewer studies on the motivation of L2 teachers, the future research agenda is much broader in Hungary. Although the exploratory study described above was a mixed-methods investigation comprising two major parts, obviously it could not cover all the important issues. The research ideas presented here have grown out of my studies summarized in Chapter 4 and these ideas include issues that I could not explain with the help of the dataset due to inherent research methods-related limitations. Cross-sectional quantitative data could provide generalizable results and the longitudinal aspects of the processes were entirely missing from the study presented in Chapter 4.6. These latter were included in the qualitative interviews, but those results cannot be generalized. – As detailed in Sect. 5.1 a teacher-specific theoretical model needs to be developed that can motivate further fine-tuned confirmatory studies into English and other foreign language teachers’ motivation in various educational contexts. – The quantitative results detailed in Chapter 4.6 warrant a number of future studies. Further confirmatory studies are needed to establish the discriminant validity of the scales and the quality of the latent dimensions and, eventually, the instrument. This is increasingly important in relation to the terminological differences between experiences and attitudes (You, Dörnyei, & Csizér, 2016), which could be resolved by the investigation how changes in attitudes and dispositions might be part of the learning/teaching experiences within the classroom context. Some studies have already looked into the internal reliability of the scales in different contexts (Szrogh & Csizér, in press), and the results show that there are certain contextual differences in the appraisal of the attitude-, selves- and experiences-related scales. Teachers of other foreign languages should also be included in future studies in order to understand how language as a variable might influence the motivational processes. Teaching the undisputed global language of today’s world is giving English teachers a considerable edge to their work but some data indicated that the motivation of teachers of LOTE might be higher than that of the English teachers’ (Szrogh & Csizér, in press). – The role of time in L2 motivation studies cannot be overestimated. In order to develop a nuanced understanding of L2 motivation of teachers, further qualitative studies are needed to map temporal changes over various timeframes: from variations in a single lesson to long-term career-related changes. As the ultimate dependent variable in this study, that is the amount of effort invested into the teaching work, seems to be a complex concept covering both teaching behavior and professional development, the contrasting analysis of state and trait motivation of L2 teachers might also provide additional insights into how time and

5.1 Toward a Theoretical Model of Language Teacher Motivation

–

–

–

–

–

105

contextual variables shape L2 motivation for L2 teachers in their early-, mid- and late-career years. Similarly to the gaps identified in student motivation, some of the theoretical considerations in L2 motivation have not found their way into the empirical arena. More studies on the attribution theory of foreign language teachers would provide insight into their motivational processes. Not only the impact of successes and failures should be investigated but also how these two processes might interact with each other in shaping teacher cognition (Borg, 2003). One of the most unexpected results is the emerging importance of self-reflection in the L2 motivation of English teachers. Despite the long-established fact that selfreflection is closely linked to professional development (Freeman & Richards, 1996), the extent to which self-reflection relates to other important motivational dispositions and how contextual constraints relate to self-reflection is still unclear in L2 motivation research. Furthermore, it needs to be established how selfreflection processes changes over time as teachers advance in their career. Finally, self-reflection seems to be especially important when the effects of various types of experiences are investigated. Based on the present dataset, the centrality of the concept cannot be debated but the internal structure of self-reflection, attitudes and experiences are unclear: Structural equation modelling as well as qualitative retrospective modelling might contribute to the investigation of this issue. More broadly, the cognitive and affective aspects of L2 teachers’ motivation are to be explored in a systematic way (Ryan, 2019). Another issue that needs to be considered when investigating teacher motivation is the possible difference between pre-service and in-service teachers, and within the large group of in-service teachers, early, mid- and late-career teachers. Exploring differences between motivation and beliefs of pre- and in-service teacher research can directly inform teacher education. Investigating teacher motivation at different points of their career could also contribute to stakeholders’ decision-making concerning regulations pertaining to teaching (Öveges & Csizér, 2018). In the investigation of English language teachers’ experiences, I focused on one particular aspect of experiences and its impact on teaching, namely, how past foreign language learning experiences might influence the current views of teaching practices (Borg, 2003). Although the intention was to tackle further experience-related issues in the interview study, such as experiences of teacher training and experiences of teaching, both initial and ongoing (Larsen-Freeman, 2015), these data emerged less characteristically, which means that more focused and targeted studies need to be planned and executed covering these topics. In addition, as this study centered on English teachers’ dispositions in a retrospective way and no observation data were collected to see how classroom experiences might be co-constructed by teachers and students (see below). Another issue needing further inquiry is choice motivation and classroom decision-making processes. Despite the fact that it seems that some of the participants’ choice motivation was not a clearly formulated decision, further studies might shed light on how early contact with foreign languages as well as success in learning and teacher training contributes to wanting to become a language

106

5 Conclusion and Further Research Directions

teacher. In the Hungarian context, both pre- and in-service teachers often leave the profession and it is not very clear what processes might lead to this decision, especially in the case of pre-service teachers (Smid, in preparation). From a different viewpoint, choice motivation is also important in classroom decisionmaking processes: Why and how they choices are selected and decided on are an entirely independent research direction (Medgyes, 2017b). – Teacher motivation is inherently a positive concept. In accordance with this notion, there has been less influence on the demotivational processes, but it does not mean that research on teacher well-being in general and teacher motivation in particular should not address negative influences as well because only the exploration of those negative influences can inform processes counteracting them. 5.1.1.3

Combing Student- and Teacher-Focused Research

As explained above, the investigation of uncharted areas in both student and teacher motivation is vital. Studies dealing with the interaction of student and teacher motivation within the confines of the classroom calls for urgent attention. For a systematic review of earlier research results in methods of motivating students as well as investigations of motivation as an interaction should be looked at. Exploring the ways teachers and students influence one another in the classroom and how motivation is socially constructed within the classroom would also be useful. In order to do this, motivational variables should be measured, and possible matches/mismatches analyzed between teacher and students. An excellent example of this is Reinders and Lázáro’s (2011) investigation which explored how mismatches between teachers’ and learners’ beliefs about autonomy relate to teachers’ motivation and identity. Matching conceptual frameworks need to be developed allowing for simultaneous operationalization of possible constructs or latent dimensions in order to have comparable teacher- and student-data. While investigating possible mismatches in attitudes, beliefs and motivational dispositions, the temporal changes in these variables should be considered. Results obtained in this way may contribute to raising the awareness of teachers about individual differences of students and help tailor their motivational work to students’ needs regardless of their own motivational profiles. For this not only empirical but theoretical research would be welcome. Furthermore, results obtained from intervallum analyses of students’ motivation should be taken into account when exploring the interaction between student and teacher motivation. There are several studies that employed the method of intervallum analysis that were detailed in Chapter 2.5 when the investigation of various timescales was discussed: I have mentioned MacIntyre and Serroul’s (2015) investigation employing short intervals to assess the changes of motivation. One of the study’s drawbacks is that it was not performed in a classroom context, and, therefore, it is difficult to draw specific classroom-related conclusions. There are some studies, however, where researchers measured L2 motivation at intervals during lessons. Pawlak (2012) assessed group-level changes in L2 motivation by asking students to indicate their level of L2 motivation for every 5 min during regular lessons resulting

5.1 Toward a Theoretical Model of Language Teacher Motivation

107

in patterns of motivation with various levels of complexity. The changes in motivation were explained by many interacting external and internal reasons, including topics, tasks, goals, group dynamics, and learner characteristics. Wening, Dörnyei and de Bot (2014) measured motivation in 5-minute intervals during a number of lessons and showed how it had fluctuated in the participating four students. Reasons given for these changes included contextual and temporal issues, such as initial motivation, positive attitudes toward the teacher and various classroom events. However, the researchers also found some inexplicable changes, for which no obvious explanations could be provided, therefore, more studies are needed to juxtapose teachers’ and students’ experiences in the classroom. Teachers’ interviews and observation data coupled with students’ dispositions could provide insight into classroom-level motivation and its changes over a single lesson. Another way of investigating changes in short-term motivation may be by focusing on task motivation. Although Kormos and Wilby (2019) outline numerous future research directions within the field of task motivation, for example, “task-related goals, values, outcome expectations, self-efficacy, intrinsic motivation, flow and interest in instruments assessing task motivation” (p. 282), the role of teachers in these processes is hardly ever raised. It is not only the learner-variables that interact within the context of particular tasks, but it might also be revealing to see how much teacher motivational dispositions shape these processes. As per Sato and Csizér (in press), the role of teachers, instruction, and classroom environment should be considered in instructed second language acquisition contexts and task motivation research is no exception. A combination of teacher- and student-focused research may also contribute to the investigation of the motivational processes in the different stages of L2 learning to observe how motivational influences can directly contribute to language learning. It has already been acknowledged that motivational strategies employed by teachers contribute to student motivation to varying degrees (Guilloteaux & Dörnyei, 2008; Papi & Abdollahzadeh, 2012; Sugita McEown & Takeuchi, 2014) but more should be discovered about the actual learning processes.

5.2 The Need for Novelty in Research Methods Although L2 motivation researchers have never shied away from methodological innovations, I would like to highlight two issues here briefly. First, what is clearly missing from the Hungarian research scene is classroom observation studies. There is no up-to-date information about what is happening in classrooms across the country in terms of foreign language education. In addition, there is a clear lack of ethnographic studies to which Henry and colleagues so convincingly referred. Multi-methods and longitudinal data can capture the complexity of classroom motivation like no other research strategy (Henry, Sundqvist, & Thorsen, 2019). Another way to make progress in our field is by conducting meta-analytical studies: the L2 motivation field has reached the level of maturity which allows for

108

5 Conclusion and Further Research Directions

meta-analyses. Although meta-analytical studies are becoming increasing popular in applied linguistics, there are still relatively few that target aspects of L2 motivation. Various background variables such as age, gender, L1, L2 proficiency, cultural background or previous learning experiences could be used to systematically compare the results of L2 motivational studies. Results of these studies could further inform more specific investigations, such as investigating the motivational profiles and patterns of mature and senior language learners which would then present another important line of research.

5.3 Final Words Many personal and professional reasons motivated me to write this monograph and getting this far is certainly a relief on many levels. Although I have been researching L2 motivation for more than 20 years, and I sit comfortably in my mid-career years, I feel that there is still so much to explore and to prove. I find being a social scientist in the twenty-first century fascinating: meeting challenges and answering questions in this digital age are more fulfilling than I would have ever imagined before wandering into Zoltán Dörnyei’s lecture on applied linguistics so many years ago. I am so happy I was there!

Appendix A

English Language Journals/Volumes Published in Hungary

University of Pécs Roundtable (UPRT) Series The English language UPRT conferences have been started by Marianne Nikolov and have been organized for several years now. The conference caters for students and researchers in applied linguistics and language pedagogy and have been complemented by the University of Zagrab Rountable conference series. The conference has been publishing peer-reviewed edited volumes based on the conference presentation. Some of the recent volumes include: https://mek.oszk.hu/kereses.mhtml?dc_creator=&dc_title=Uprt&dc_subject=& sort=rk_szerzo%2Crk_uniform&id=&Image3.x=0&Image3.y=0. 2011: https://books.google.hu/books?id=QJEI0CbBGBsC&pg=PA44&dq=uni versity+p%C3%A9cs+roundtable&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjKvMGx27foA hWQ-yoKHUg9A2IQ6AEIODAC#v=onepage&q=university%20p%C3%A9cs% 20roundtable&f=false. 2015: https://books.google.hu/books?id=yI3VDAAAQBAJ&pg=PP5&dq=uni versity+p%C3%A9cs+roundtable&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjKvMGx27foA hWQ-yoKHUg9A2IQ6AEIPzAD#v=onepage&q=university%20p%C3%A9cs% 20roundtable&f=false. 2017: https://books.google.hu/books?id=slWLDwAAQBAJ&pg=PA112&dq= university+p%C3%A9cs+roundtable+2017&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiSj4X M27foAhUDrosKHRc1BgoQ6AEIKDAA#v=onepage&q=university%20p%C3% A9cs%20roundtable%202017&f=false.

Working Papers in Language Pedagogy Homepage: http://langped.elte.hu/WoPaLP.htm. Mission statement/information from homepage: © Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020 K. Csizér, Second Language Learning Motivation in a European Context: The Case of Hungary, Second Language Learning and Teaching, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-64462-8

109

110

Appendix A: English Language Journals/Volumes Published in Hungary

Working Papers in Language Pedagogy publishes original articles reporting on the findings of either empirical or theoretical research in all subdisciplines of language pedagogy and applied linguistics. It is a refereed on-line forum of publication for PhD program participants, staff and independent researchers published on an annual basis by the Language Pedagogy PhD Program, Eötvös Loránd University at the http:// langped.elte.hu/WoPaLP.htm website. Papers originating from research conducted as part of PhD students’ dissertation research are especially welcome. In addition to original research, Working Papers in Language Pedagogy also publishes book reviews. We invite authors and publishers to contact us by email to notify us of a book they would like to have reviewed. We do not accept unsolicited reviews. The papers published in Working Papers in Language Pedagogy can equally command the interest of professionals and researchers working in language pedagogy and applied linguistics, practising teachers, teacher trainees and trainers, language policy makers in national and international organizations. As the journal pursues a blind peer-review process, all submissions are refereed by at least two reviewers and their acceptance is decided by the Editorial Board. One of the reviewers is a member of the staff of the Language Pedagogy PhD Program and the Editorial Board, and the other reviewer is external to the program, and is a member of the international Advisory Board of the journal. Working Papers in Language Pedagogy does not charge the authors any processing fee. The reviewers and editors work pro bono. NovELTy: A Journal of English Language Teaching and Cultural Studies in Hungary This is a now defunct peer-reviewed journal that had been published for several years (mainly before the internet era) in Hungary under the aegis of the British Council. Some of the back issues could be found here at the time of the writing: http://deal.elte.hu/pages/novelty/index.htm. IATEFL-Hungary Volumes https://www.iatefl.hu/node/123. Yearly compilation containing a selection of peer-reviewed papers presented at the IATEFL-Hungary conferences. The volumes are available online. Journal of Adult Learning, Knowledge and Innovation Homepage: https://akademiai.com/loi/jalki. This recently established journal, as part of the peer-reviewed English-language publications of the Hungarian Academy of Science, cater for adult learning in general, including language learning as well. Mission statement/information from homepage: This journal strives to be inclusive in scope by understanding and interpreting adult learning and knowledge construction at the intersection of theory and practice, including formal, non-formal and informal learning contexts. It publishes empirical and theoretical papers that promote a problem-oriented, and/or a critical approach to research and scholarship, going beyond description of practice. Across Languages and Cultures Homepage: https://akademiai.com/loi/084.

Appendix A: English Language Journals/Volumes Published in Hungary

111

Mission statement/information from homepage: Across Languages and Cultures publishes original articles and reviews on all subdisciplines of Translation and Interpreting (T/I) Studies: general T/I theory, descriptive T/I studies and applied T/I studies. Special emphasis is laid on the questions of multilingualism, language policy and translation policy. Publications on new research methods and models are encouraged. Publishes book reviews, news, announcements and advertisements.

Appendix B

Questionnaire Items Used in Jánosházi and Csizér (2011)

Instruction: The following statements refer to your English language classes and groups at school. Please put an X in the box which reflects your opinion the most appropriately. Note at all true

Slightly true

Somewhat true

Mostly true

Completely true

There is a good atmosphere during English classes I generally have a feeling of success during English classes Our English class tends to break into several smaller groups, it typically forms cliques I learn easily in my English group. There are rules in our English group, which everyone must obey (continued)

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020 K. Csizér, Second Language Learning Motivation in a European Context: The Case of Hungary, Second Language Learning and Teaching, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-64462-8

113

114

Appendix B: Questionnaire Items Used in Jánosházi and Csizér (2011)

(continued) Note at all true

Slightly true

Somewhat true

Mostly true

Completely true

Members of my English group do not make fun of me if I make a mistake I feel confident during English classes I and the other members of my English group have a lot in common I feel that I am accepted by the members of my group I know my group members well. We talk a lot with my group members I and my group members meet after classes I like working with the members of my group during lessons Members of the group do not tend to compete with one another I trust the members of my group Our group is solidary I feel that when we work together in our group, we can achieve more than individually (continued)

Appendix B: Questionnaire Items Used in Jánosházi and Csizér (2011)

115

(continued) Note at all true I like my group members. The members of my group mutually help each other Members of my group are ready to help me if I need help Members of the group pay attention to one another Compared to other groups, I think ours is the best I would rather study in a different group If I were to change groups, I would like the members to be similar to those that I am with now We suit each other in my group I think some members feel uncomfortable in this group Our group has a name, a lucky charm, a motto or a logo If a new member arrives, we accept them easily The teacher of my English group knows our names My teacher often smiles at us My teacher notices if I have a new hairstyle or my clothes are different My teacher remembers our birthdays and name days My English teacher sends me the homework if I am sick

Slightly true

Somewhat true

Mostly true

Completely true

Appendix C

Questionnaire Used in Csizér and Kormos (2008a, 2008b, 2009a)

We would like to ask you to help us by answering the following questions concerning foreign language learning. This is not a test so there are no “right” or “wrong” answers and you don’t even have to write your name on the form. We are interested in your personal opinion. Please answer as honestly as you can as this will guarantee the success of the investigation. Thank you very much for your help. I. In the following section we would like you to answer some questions by simply giving marks from 1 to 5. 5 = very much, 4 = quite a lot, 3 = so-so, 2 = not really, 1 = not at all. For example, if you like “hamburgers” very much, “bean soup” not very much, and “spinach” not at all, write this:

How much do you like these foods?

Hamburgers

Bean soup

Spinach

5

2

1

Please put one (and only one) whole number in each box and don’t leave out any of them. Thanks. 5 = very much, 4 = quite a lot, 3 = so-so, 2 = not really, 1 = not at all. German English 1. How much do you like these languages? 2. How much do you think knowing these languages would help you to become a more knowledgeable person? 3. How important do you think these languages are in the world these days? 4. How important do you think learning these languages is in order to learn more about the culture and art of its speakers? 5. How much do you think knowing these languages would help you when traveling abroad in the future? (continued) © Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020 K. Csizér, Second Language Learning Motivation in a European Context: The Case of Hungary, Second Language Learning and Teaching, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-64462-8

117

118

Appendix C: Questionnaire Used in Csizér and Kormos (2008a, 2008b, 2009a)

(continued) German English 6. How much do you think knowing these languages would help your future career? 7. How much would you like to become similar to the people who speak these languages? 8. How useful do you think an intermediate level language exam would be for you in these languages? (Write 9 if you already have one.) 9. How much would knowing these languages help you in pursuing your hobby or favorite activities? 10. How important is it for you to get to know the speakers of the languages you are learning? 11. How much effort are you prepared to expend on learning these languages?

5 = very much, 4 = quite a lot, 3 = so-so, 2 = not really, 1 = not at all. England Germany USA Austria 12. How much would you like to travel to these countries (again)? 13. How rich and developed do you think these countries are? 14. How important a role do you think these countries play in the world? 15. How much do you like meeting foreigners from these countries? 16. How much do you like the people who live in these countries? 17. How often do you meet foreigners (e.g. in the street, restaurants, public places) coming from these countries? 18. How would you like it if someone from these countries moved to your neighborhood? 19. How much would you like to live in these countries?

The questions below refer to the language you are learning at school 5 = very much, 4 = quite a lot, 3 = so-so, 2 = not really, 1 = not at all. 20. How often did you speak a foreign language during your visit in a foreign country? (Write 9, if you have never been abroad.) 21. How often do you speak a foreign language with people living in your neighborhood? 22. How often do you speak a foreign language with your friends/acquaintances from abroad? 23. How often did you speak a foreign language when on holiday in Hungary? (continued)

Appendix C: Questionnaire Used in Csizér and Kormos (2008a, 2008b, 2009a)

119

(continued) 24. How often do you speak a foreign language with foreign visitors (adults or children) at your school? 25. How often do you chat on the internet in a foreign language? 26. How often do you write letters in a foreign language? 27. How often do you write e-mails in a foreign language? 28. How often do you see foreigners (e.g. in the street, restaurants, public places)? 29. How often does your teacher speak about the life in the country whose language you are learning? 30. How often does anyone in your family speak about the life in the country whose language you are learning? 31. How often do your friends/acquaintances speak about the life in the country whose language you are learning? 32. How often do you watch films in a foreign language? 33. How often do you read book in a foreign language? 34. How often do read internet homepages in a foreign language? 35. How often do you watch foreign language TV channels? (e.g.: BBC, CNN, RTL, SAT1, ÖRF) 36. How often do you read newspapers/magazines in a foreign language?

Have you put a number in each box? Thank you! II. Below are statements some people agree with while others don’t. We would like to know the extent of which they describe your own feelings or situation. After each statement you’ll find five boxes. Please put an ‘X’ in the box which best expresses how true the statement is for you. For example, if you like skiing very much, put an ‘X’ in the last box: Not true at all I like skiing very much

Not really true

Partly true, partly untrue

Mostly true

Absolutely true X

There are no right or wrong answers—we are interested in your personal opinion. Not true at all Not really true Partly true, Mostly true Absolutely true partly untrue 37. I am sure I will be able to learn a foreign language well (continued)

120

Appendix C: Questionnaire Used in Csizér and Kormos (2008a, 2008b, 2009a)

(continued) Not true at all Not really true Partly true, Mostly true Absolutely true partly untrue 38. I think I am a type of person who would feel anxious if I had to speak to someone in a foreign language 39. I think that foreign languages are important school subjects 40. My parents consider foreign languages important school subjects 41. Learning a foreign language is a difficult task 42. People around me tend to think that it is a good thing to know foreign languages 43. I think it is useful to talk to foreigners because I can get to know how they live (continued)

Appendix C: Questionnaire Used in Csizér and Kormos (2008a, 2008b, 2009a)

121

(continued) Not true at all Not really true Partly true, Mostly true Absolutely true partly untrue 44. I think it is useful to talk to foreigners because I can get to know their pronunciation and vocabulary 45. I think it is useful to talk to foreigners because it is different to hear someone speaking his or her mother tongue from learning it at school 46. I think it is a good experience to use the language with foreigners 47. I think it is useful to talk to foreigners because the more I talk to them, the more I will like learning the language (continued)

122

Appendix C: Questionnaire Used in Csizér and Kormos (2008a, 2008b, 2009a)

(continued) Not true at all Not really true Partly true, Mostly true Absolutely true partly untrue 48. I think it is useful to talk to foreigners because if something does not go smoothly, I will decide to put more effort into language learning 49. Before actually meeting foreigners, I will prepare for the forthcoming situations (e.g., I will look up words in a dictionary or think about possible questions) 50. I think it is useful to talk to foreigners because the more I talk to them, the less anxious I feel during speaking to them (continued)

Appendix C: Questionnaire Used in Csizér and Kormos (2008a, 2008b, 2009a)

123

(continued) Not true at all Not really true Partly true, Mostly true Absolutely true partly untrue 51. I think that I am more hardworking than other students in my group 52. All in all, I am satisfied with the level I have reached this far 53. All in all, I like learning foreign languages 54. All in all, I am satisfied with my achievements in the foreign language classroom 55. I feel I could be more hardworking when it comes to foreign language learning 56. As for the foreign language classes, I study a lot: I always do the homework, study the grammar rules and words (continued)

124

Appendix C: Questionnaire Used in Csizér and Kormos (2008a, 2008b, 2009a)

(continued) Not true at all Not really true Partly true, Mostly true Absolutely true partly untrue 57. I would like to learn the foreign language as much as I can

III. Below are statements some people find true while others don’t. Please put an ‘X’ in the box which best expresses the statement for you. For example, if you have visited Lake Balaton several times, put an ‘X’ in the last box: No, never

Yes, once

Have you ever visited Lake Balaton?

Yes, several times X

Please put one ‘X’ in each row! No, never Yes, once Yes, several times 58. Have you ever visited any English-speaking countries? 59. Have you ever visited any German-speaking countries? 60. Have you ever visited any other foreigner countries? 61. Have you ever been abroad on a school visit or student exchange program? 62. Have you ever hosted any foreigner exchange students? 63. Have you ever been abroad on a language course?

IV. Finally, please answer these few personal questions. 64. If you could choose, which foreign languages would you study next year at school (or work)? Please mark three languages in order of importance. 1)……………….. 2)……………….. 3)……………….. 65. What foreign language(s) are you studying at school? …..……………. 66. Have you studied any foreign languages outside school? …………………………..…………..

Appendix C: Questionnaire Used in Csizér and Kormos (2008a, 2008b, 2009a)

125

67. If yes, which ones? ……………………………………….. 68. Are you studying the language you chose at school outside of school as well? …………………………………….. 69. At what age did you start studying foreign languages? ………..………………..………….. 70. Was the language you started studying at school your first choice of foreign language? …………..………………..………….. 71. If not, originally which language did you want to study at school? ………..………………..…………..

Appendix D

The English Version of the Teacher Interview Guide in Csizér (2020)

Dear …, Thank you very much for taking part in the interview and helping with my work. My name is Kata Csizér and I work at the Department of Applied Linguistics at ELTE. The aim of my research is to shed light on some of the language learning as well as the teaching experiences of language teachers. The interviews will be used for research purposes only, and the analysis will be made using a summary of data collected. Full anonymity is ensured, and no personal details will be made public. I am interested in hearing your personal experiences and opinions rather than the ‘right’ answers; there are no right or wrong answers. The interview is going to take approximately one hour, and, with your permission, I’d like to record our conversation. We can start when you’re ready. 1.

Please provide a brief, professional profile of yourself (in chronological order). In terms of education/qualifications: • Which schools did you go to? • What are your qualifications (college degree, university degree, 3–4–5 year course, one or two programs, etc.)? • Do you have a language teaching qualification? Do you have any other qualifications? • Please tell me you age. In terms of work experience: • • • •

How long have you been teaching? Where have you worked so far? Have you always worked as a language teacher? What other jobs have you had?

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020 K. Csizér, Second Language Learning Motivation in a European Context: The Case of Hungary, Second Language Learning and Teaching, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-64462-8

127

128

2.

Appendix D: The English Version of the Teacher Interview Guide in Csizér (2020)

I’d like you to talk about your own language learning experiences a little. In terms of language study: • • • • • •

What languages did you study? When did you start learning languages? How long did you study them? What level did you manage to achieve? Did you spend some time abroad to help you learn the language? How did living abroad influence your learning and the way that you learned foreign languages? In terms of experiences and memories as a language learner: • What kind of memories and experiences do you have? • What impact have these experiences had on you? • What kind of language learner were you?

3.

I’d like to ask you about your experiences as a language teacher now. • What memories do you have about your language teachers? • To what extent did your own language learning experiences affect your decision to become a teacher? • How do your learning experiences affect the way you teach?

4.

Regarding foreign languages in your life: • When and how do you use foreign languages in your life? • When and how do you develop your language skills? • Why is there a need to do that?

5.

Let’s go back in time a little. • When did you decide to become a language teacher? • Why did you decide to become one? • Who supported you in your decision? Was there anyone who opposed your decision?

6.

Let’s talk about your experiences preparing to be a teacher. • What memorable experiences do you have from your time at university or college? • What notions or expectations would you say you had back then about starting to teach independently one day? • To what extent were these expectations met? • What have you found to be the most useful things that you learned during your university or college years/in the teacher-training course/in any other course you may have taken?

Appendix D: The English Version of the Teacher Interview Guide in Csizér (2020)

7.

129

Let’s talk about values related to teaching. • What personal and professional values do you consider as being important in your job? • Why is your job important to you? • And why, in general, is the job of a teacher important? • How do you feel now; do you think you made the right decision to choose this profession? What decision would you make now? • Where do you see yourself in five, or ten years’ time? Will you still be teaching? • As a teacher what external expectations do you have to fulfil at school/in society/in your immediate surroundings?

8.

In the second part of the interview, I would like to talk about your views on motivation. Defining motivation: • How would you define the concept of motivation? • What factors contribute to learner motivation when learning a language? • In your opinion, whose responsibility is it to motivate students when learning a foreign language? In terms of importance of motivation and strategies to promote: • Why is motivation important when learning languages? • How do you motivate your students to invest as much effort as possible into language learning? • What tricks and strategies do you use to spark student interest? How do you keep them motivated during classes? In terms of student success: • What would you like to achieve with your students? When do you feel you’ve done a good job? In terms of teacher motivation: • How does your own level of motivation affect your teaching? • How do you motivate yourself to do as good a job as you can?

9.

Why do you like teaching? • On what occasions do you particularly enjoy what you do? Can you please describe these experiences? (details and examples: Can you give an example) • What about when you don’t enjoy your job so much? Can you please describe these experiences? (details and examples: Can you give an example)

10. Teacher development Let’s reflect on your teaching skills: • What are your strengths and weaknesses? • How and why have these developed? Let’s reflect on your experiences:

130

Appendix D: The English Version of the Teacher Interview Guide in Csizér (2020)

• What are some of the successes you’ve had? • What are some of the failures you’ve experienced? • How would you account for these experiences? Professional development and confidence: • How do you improve yourself as a teacher? • How confident are you as a teacher? • In which areas do you feel the most confident? And the least confident? Is there anything else you would like to add? If not, thank you very much for your help.

Appendix E

The English Version of the Teacher Questionnaire in Csizér (2020)

Research into English language teaching Dear Colleague, I’d like to thank you for participating in this research about the work of English language teachers. The following questionnaire takes 15–20 min to complete, and it is anonymous. All questions are about your work as an English language teacher. I am very grateful to you for taking time to answer the questions and, by doing so, helping the research process. Dr. Kata Wein Csizér Department of English Applied Linguistics at Eötvös Lóránd University.

Section 1 Please indicate how far you agree with the following statements. 5 indicates strong agreement whereas 1 indicates strong disagreement. You can, of course, use the numbers in between. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7.

It is very important for me that my lessons are of good quality. I regularly attend professional development sessions so that I can improve professionally. I am able to apply teaching methodologies successfully, leading to student improvement. I really enjoy the fact that my job involves dealing with people. I think I have a good repertoire of teaching methodologies at my disposal. I think my job as a language teacher is important because, nowadays, knowing a foreign language is a vital part of education. Before the lesson, I think about how it will go, step by step.

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020 K. Csizér, Second Language Learning Motivation in a European Context: The Case of Hungary, Second Language Learning and Teaching, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-64462-8

131

132

8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35.

Appendix E: The English Version of the Teacher Questionnaire in Csizér (2020)

I consider my job as a language teacher to be important because one cannot do well without knowing a foreign language these days. What I like about teaching is that my knowledge about teaching methodologies is constantly improving. Whenever I feel that I’m tired of teaching, I’m able to get over this feeling. I regularly attend conferences so that I can develop professionally. I feel that I am a successful language teacher. I would have liked to learn from a teacher similar to the kind of teacher I am now. I use English confidently outside the classroom. My memories of foreign language learning have an effect on my teaching. I try to take students’ individual needs into account. I usually think about which stage a particular class or a student is at, in terms of learning development. I think my job as a language teacher is important because English is the language of a global world. All in all, I feel confident in my job. My experiences as a language learner are very good because I had good teachers. I really like the fact that I can continuously improve myself in my work. I think I have a talent for teaching languages. I consider myself as a motivated language teacher. To me, success means that my students have learned something in my classes. If I come across a problem in English language teaching, I always try to find a solution. During lessons, I try to use activities that I myself would enjoy doing. I really like teaching because I see that my students are learning a language. Being successful is always being able to improve my skills as a teacher. I constantly develop the materials I use. To me, success is when my students are using the language outside lesson time. I feel less confident in certain areas of my work. There is a set of teaching methodologies that I can use successfully. My experiences as a language learner were very good despite not having had very good teachers. My own language learning experiences do not count; what is important is that I take into consideration my students’ needs. I consider my job as a language teacher to be important because, nowadays, everyone needs to speak English.

Section 2 Please indicate how far you agree with the following statements. 5 indicates strong agreement whereas 1 indicates strong disagreement. You can, of course, use the numbers in between.

Appendix E: The English Version of the Teacher Questionnaire in Csizér (2020)

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34.

133

I usually think about the particular problems a class or a student is having. To me, success is when I can motivate my students. I plan every lesson thoroughly. Teaching is one of the most important things in my life. I like teaching very much because I can make teaching related decisions on my own. If something went particularly well during the lesson, one needs to consider why it went well. I use English confidently in the classroom. I regularly attend book launch events, organized by publishers, so that I can develop professionally. To me, success means hearing students use English in my classes. I enjoy the intellectual challenges teaching brings. I enjoy thinking together about the lessons with my colleagues. I can train my students to become successful language learners. I had a very good language teacher who taught me not only the language, but also how to be good at teaching that language. I am confident in setting an example of me as a language learner to students. I often think about what constitutes a good lesson. I enjoy my classes as a teacher. I often think that it was a good decision to become a language teacher. I consider my work as a language teacher to be important because one can get by anywhere in the world with English. I do everything I possibly can to improve my English knowledge. I enjoy teaching very much. I consider my work as a language teacher to be important because students have to take a foreign language as part of their school-leaving exam. My success is my students’ success. I do everything I possibly can to be a good teacher. I consider my work as a language teacher to be important because a language exam is crucial for further study. If any problems arise when I teach, I try to find a teaching methodology theory that would help me. I try to teach in a similar way to those I see as role models. What I like in my job is the fact that my language skills are always improving. My own language learning experiences have strongly influenced me as a teacher. When planning my lessons, I always take into account what happened in the previous lesson. Usually, I feel enthusiastic about going to my classes. If something went wrong during a lesson, I spend a lot of time thinking about the reasons as to why it went wrong. In my work, I really enjoy being open about things that happen in the world. I regularly attend training sessions on language examinations so that I can improve professionally. I usually read professional journals about education.

134

Appendix E: The English Version of the Teacher Questionnaire in Csizér (2020)

35. My lessons have a good atmosphere. 36. I enjoy planning for my lessons very much.

Section 3 How difficult are the following issues for you? 5 indicates very difficult, 1 indicates not difficult at all. You can, of course, use the numbers in between. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18.

Administrative tasks Lack of teaching equipment/facilities at my school Large student numbers in classes Different levels of ability within the same class Keeping contact with parents Student assessments High number of contact hours Lesson planning Managing work stress Receiving low pay The textbook I have to use to teach The syllabus Not having a say in many teaching related things Having to teach the same content every year Not being able to progress in my career Feeling that I cannot improve professionally Student performance levels not meeting my expectations Level of job responsibility.

Section 4 Please answer the following general questions. 1.

Gender • Male • Female

2. 3.

Age (year) What is your highest level of qualification? • • • •

Certificate (DELTA, CELTA, etc.) College degree University degree Doctorate degree

Appendix E: The English Version of the Teacher Questionnaire in Csizér (2020)

135

• Other. 4.

At which type of institution are you currently teaching? • • • • •

5.

Do you teach any languages other than English? More than one answer is possible. • • • • • • •

6.

Yes, German Yes, Italian Yes, French Yes, Spanish Yes, Russian No Other.

Do you teach any subjects other than English language? More than one answer is possible. If the subject you teach is not on the list, please click ’Other’, and write the name of the subject you teach. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

7. 8.

Primary school Secondary school Vocational school University Other.

No Mother tongue language and literature History Mathematics Music Dance and drama Biology Chemistry Physics Geography Information Technology (IT) Visual Arts Physical Education (PE) Design Technology (DT) Ethics Other.

How long have you been teaching? Are you a native speaker or a non-native speaker of English? • Native speaker • Non-native speaker.

136

9.

Appendix E: The English Version of the Teacher Questionnaire in Csizér (2020)

Have you ever lived in an English-speaking country for more than six months? • Yes • No.

10. If yes, where? Please indicate the name of the country. If you did not live in an English-speaking country, please do not write anything.

Appendix F

Factor Analysis of the Demotivational Items (Csizér 2020)

The results of the factor analysis of the demotivational items (PC, varimax rotation, Csizér, 2019b, p. 181). Item describing demotivation

Factors 1

2

3

4

5

Teaching-related administrative tasks Lack of teaching equipment at school

0.594

Too large groups

0.739

Difference in FL knowledge in the group

0.520

Keeping contact with parents High contact hours

0.633

Preparing for classes

0.525

Work-related stress

0.620

Low salary

0.552

The course book I must use

0.576

Requirements of the curricula

0.705

Lack of autonomy in making teaching-related decisions

0.623

That I have to teach the same things each year

0.698

Lack of progress in my career That I feel I cannot develop professionally

0.766

Lower than expected student achievements Assessment of students

0.519

Responsibility related to my work

0.604

Note Items in italics failed to load onto any of the scales in a substantial way (loadings >0.50)

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020 K. Csizér, Second Language Learning Motivation in a European Context: The Case of Hungary, Second Language Learning and Teaching, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-64462-8

137

Appendix G

Student Questionnaire in Illés and Csizér (2010)

We would like to ask you to participate in our research by answering the following questions about language learning. This questionnaire is not a test and there are no right or wrong answers. It is anonymous so you do not have to write your name. What we are interested in is what you think about the issues raised in the questionnaire. The success of our research depends on how honestly you answer the questions, so please make sure that your answers reflect what you think. We will ensure that nobody from your school has access to the completed questionnaires. Thank you very much for your help. I. First of all, circle your answers to the questions in each line, depending on how true the statements are of you. 5 = very much, 4 = quite true, 3 = more or less, 2 = not really, 1 = not at all. For example, if you like apples a lot, consommé not really and spinach not at all, your answers should look like this: How much do you like apples?

5

4

3

How much do you like consommé?

5

4

3

How much do you like spinach?

5

4

3

2 2

2

1 1 1

5 = very much, 4 = quite true, 3 = more or less, 2 = not really, 1 = not at all. 1. In English lesson we often use supplementary materials

5 4 3 2 1

2. In English lessons we often discuss language problems raised by students

5 4 3 2 1

3. When I speak English in the lessons, I have to be very careful not to make any 5 4 3 2 1 mistakes 4. When I walk in the street I deliberately seek out public signs written in English in order to learn new vocabulary

5 4 3 2 1 (continued)

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020 K. Csizér, Second Language Learning Motivation in a European Context: The Case of Hungary, Second Language Learning and Teaching, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-64462-8

139

140

Appendix G: Student Questionnaire in Illés and Csizér (2010)

(continued) 5. It is very important for me to learn to speak English very well

5 4 3 2 1

6. If I spoke English well, I would get to know more people from different (not only English speaking) countries

5 4 3 2 1

7. Our English teacher mentions varieties of English which do not feature in our 5 4 3 2 1 books 8. Our teacher accepts when we use examples we heard outside of school

5 4 3 2 1

9. I try to use English outside of school as much as possible

5 4 3 2 1

10. I use English with non-native speakers more often than with native speakers 5 4 3 2 1 11. We come across English used by non-native speakers in our lessons

5 4 3 2 1

12. In English lessons I use expressions which I learnt outside of school

5 4 3 2 1

13. I do my best to learn to speak English very well

5 4 3 2 1

14. We can find everything in our books that is necessary to learn to speak English well

5 4 3 2 1

15. When I go shopping, I seek out labels written in English so that I can learn English from them

5 4 3 2 1

16. I would like to be able to speak English well so that I can make myself understood by people from different countries

5 4 3 2 1

17. I am willing to make a lot of effort in order to learn to speak English very well

5 4 3 2 1

18. In English lessons it is mainly British English that we learn

5 4 3 2 1

19. In English lessons the teacher explains language problems to us even if they 5 4 3 2 1 are not related to the material we are learning 20. In English lessons we often study materials which are supplied by the students

5 4 3 2 1

21. In English lessons we often discuss language problems which we have come 5 4 3 2 1 across outside of school 22. Learning English is one of the most important things in my life

5 4 3 2 1

23. We compare British, American and other varieties in English lessons

5 4 3 2 1

24. When I watch TV, I look for English speaking channels so that I can improve 5 4 3 2 1 my language skills 25. I do not like the fact that non-native speakers of English often make mistakes 5 4 3 2 1 when they speak English 26. I am determined to learn English

5 4 3 2 1

II. Please give your answers between 1-5, depending on how often you use the English language in the following situations. 5 = very often, 4 = fairly often, 3 = often, 2 = seldom, 1 = never. 27. How often do you watch English-speaking films? 28. How often do you read books in English? 29. How often do you log on to English-speaking websites? (continued)

Appendix G: Student Questionnaire in Illés and Csizér (2010)

141

(continued) 30. How often do you watch English-speaking programs on TV? 31. How often do you read newspapers and magazines written in English?

II/A. Please give your answers between 1-5, depending on how often you use the English language in the following situations again, but this time please distinguish whether you use English with a NATIVE or a NON-NATIVE SPEAKER. 5 = very often, 4 = fairly often, 3 = often, 2 = seldom, 1 = never. Please put a number in both columns. Native speaker Non-native speaker 32. How often did you speak English when you travelled abroad? (Put 9 if you have never been abroad.) 33. How often do you speak English with foreigners living in your neighborhood? 34. How often do you speak English with foreign friends and acquaintances? 35. How often did you speak English when you were on holiday in Hungary? 36. How often do you speak English with adults and children who visit your school from abroad? 37. How often do you chat in English on the internet? 38. How often do you write letters (snail mail) to friends and acquaintances who live abroad? 39. How often do you write emails in English? 40. How often do you play online games in English?

Have you put a number in both columns? Thank you. III. In the following section there are statements which are true for some people but not for others. We would like to find out to what extent these statements reflect your feelings and circumstances. Please put an X in the box, next to the statement which reflects most truthfully what you think. For example, if you like skiing a lot, put an X in the first box: Perfectly true I like skiing a lot

Quite true

Partly true, partly not

Not really true

Not true at all

X

There are no right or wrong answers—we are interested in your opinion here.

142

Appendix G: Student Questionnaire in Illés and Csizér (2010) Perfectly Quite true true

Partly true, partly not

Not really true

Not true at all

41. I know how to speak English politely 42. I know with whom I have to speak politely 43. I know who I can use slang with 44. I learn English slang outside of school 45. I try my best to speak politely with native speakers 46. I do not speak that politely with non-native speakers 47. At school we learn how to speak English politely 48. At school we learn with whom we have to speak politely 49. The kind of English I come across in everyday life is more complex in its vocabulary than the kind of English we learn in class 50. The kind of English I come across in everyday life has more complex phrases and idioms than the kind of English we use in the lessons 51. The kind of English I come across in everyday life is more complex in its grammar than the kind of English we use in the lessons 52. We do not use slang in the English lessons (continued)

Appendix G: Student Questionnaire in Illés and Csizér (2010)

143

(continued) Perfectly Quite true true

Partly true, partly not

Not really true

Not true at all

53. The kind of English I come across in everyday life is less polite than the English we use in class 54. In the lessons I would like to learn the kind of English I come across in everyday life 55. The vocabulary I use in the lessons is different from the vocabulary I come across in everyday life 56. The English we use in the lessons is different in its grammar from the grammar of the English I come across in everyday life 57. I am of the view that the kind of English non-native speakers use is simpler than the English used by native speakers 58. Non-native speakers are easier to understand because of their pronunciation 59. A good English lesson is when the teacher supplements the textbook tasks with other materials 60. I think I can learn much more English outside of school than in the lessons 61. English is one of the most important foreign languages in the world (continued)

144

Appendix G: Student Questionnaire in Illés and Csizér (2010)

(continued) Perfectly Quite true true

Partly true, partly not

Not really true

Not true at all

62. Learning English enables me to understand people from all over the world 63. When I speak English outside of school, the only thing that matters is that people understand me 64. It is difficult to speak with native speakers because it is difficult to understand their accents 65. When I speak English outside of school, mistakes do not matter 66. It is easier to understand non-native speakers because they do not use as many idioms as native speakers

IV. Finally, please provide a few personal details. 67. Your gender (underline as appropriate): male female 68. How old are you? …………………………………… 69. What is the level of your knowledge of English? (Underline as appropriate): beginner

intermediate

advanced

70. Will you take the school-leaving exam in English? (Underline as appropriate). Yes, at intermediate level

Yes, at advanced level

No

References

Acheson, K., Taylor, J., & Luna, K. (2016). The burnout spiral: The emotion labor of five rural U.S. foreign language teachers. The Modern Language Journal, 100, 522–537. Ames, C. (1992). Classrooms: Goals, structures, and student motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84, 261–271. Albert, Á., Tankó, G., & Piniel, K. (2018a). Students in year 7. In E. Öveges & K Csizér (Eds.), Foreign language learning education in Hungary: A study into primary and secondary schools (pp. 55–92). Budapest, Hungary: Education Authority Office (in Hungarian). Albert, Á., Tankó, G., & Piniel, K. (2018b). Students in year 11. In E. Öveges & K. Csizér (Eds.), Foreign language learning education in Hungary: A study into primary and secondary schools (pp. 93–163). Budapest, Hungary: Education Authority Office (in Hungarian). Allport, W. G. (1954). The nature of prejudice. Cambridge, MA: Addison-Wesley. Asztalos, R. (2016). The pedagogical purposes of the use of virtual learning environments and Web 2.0 tools in tertiary language teaching in a blended learning environment (PhD dissertation). Eötvös Loránd University, Budapest, Hungary. Asztalos, R., Szénich, A., & Csizér, K. (2020). Foreign language teaching and autonomous language learning—An overview and innovative practices in Hungary. In C. Ludwig, M. G. Tassinari & J. Mynard (Eds.), Navigating foreign language learner autonomy (pp. 299–316). Candlin & Mynard e-publishing. Atkinson, J. W., & Raynor, J. O. (Eds.). (1974). Motivation and achievement. Washington, DC: Winston & Sons. Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Bandura, A. (1988). Self-efficacy conception of anxiety. Anxiety Research, 1, 77–98. Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York, NY: Freeman. Benson, P. (2006). Autonomy in language teaching and learning. Language Teaching, 40(1), 21–40. Blazsán, D. (2019). Investigating English teachers’ burnout: A qualitative study (MA thesis). Eötvös University, Budapest, Hungary. Boo, Z., Dörnyei, Z., & Ryan, S. (2015). L2 motivation research 2005–2014: Understanding a publication surge and a changing landscape. System, 55, 147–157. Borg, S. (2003). Teacher cognition in language teaching: A review of research on what language teachers think, know, believe, and do. Language Teaching, 36, 81–109. Bosnyák, J., & Gáncs, N. (2012). The motivational disposition of English language teacher candidates. Working Papers in Language Pedagogy, 6, 64–78.

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020 K. Csizér, Second Language Learning Motivation in a European Context: The Case of Hungary, Second Language Learning and Teaching, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-64462-8

145

146

References

Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In K. A. Bollen & J. S. Long (Eds.), Testing structural models (pp. 136–162). Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Brophy, J. (1987). Synthesis of research on strategies for motivating students to learn. Educational Leadership, 45, 40–48. Brophy, J., & Good, T. L. (1986). Teacher behavior and student achievement. In M. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (pp. 329–375). New York, NY: Macmillan. Byrne, B. M. (2001). Structural equation modeling with AMOS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Byrne, B. M., & Crombie, G. (2003). Modeling and testing change: An introduction to the latent growth curve model. Understanding Statistics, 2, 177–203. Carlson, R. (1965). Stability and change in the adolescent’s self-image. Child Development, 36, 659–666. Chambers, G. N. (1993). Taking the ‘de’ out of demotivation. Language Learning Journal, 7, 13–16. Chan, L. (2014). Effects of an imagery training strategy on Chinese university students’ possible second language selves and learning experiences. In K. Csizér & M. Magid (Eds.), The impact of self-concept on language learning (pp. 357–376). Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters. Cheng, H.-F., & Dörnyei, Z. (2007). The use of motivational strategies in language instruction: The case of EFL teaching in Taiwan. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 1, 153–174. Clément, R. (1980). Ethnicity, contact and communicative competence in a second language. In H. M. Giles, W. P. Robinson, & P. M. Smith (Eds.), Language: Social psychological perspectives (pp. 147–154). Oxford, UK: Pergamon. Clément, R., Dörnyei, Z., & Noels, K. (1994). Motivation, self-confidence and group cohesion in the foreign language classroom. Language Learning, 44, 417–448. Clément, R., Gardner, R. C., & Smythe, P. C. (1977). Motivational variables in second language acquisition: A study of francophones leaning English. Canadian Journal of Behavioral Science, 9, 123–133. Clément, R., & Kruidenier, B. G. (1983). Orientation in second language acquisition: I. The effects of ethnicity, milieu, and target language on their emergence. Language Learning, 33, 273–291. Clément, R., & Kruidenier, B. G. (1985). Aptitude, attitude and motivation in second language proficiency: A test of Clément’s model. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 4, 21–37. Clément, R., Noels, K. A., & Deneault, B. (2001). Interethnic contact, identity, and psychological adjustment: The mediating and moderating roles of communication. Journal of Social Issues, 57, 559–577. Council of Europe. (2001). Common European Framework of Reference for languages: Learning, teaching and assessment. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Creswell, J. (2012). Educational research: Planning, conducting and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (4th ed.). New York, NY: Pearson Education. Crookes, G., & Schmidt, R. (1991). Motivation: Reopening the research agenda. Language Learning, 41, 469–512. Csapó, B., Bodorkós, L., & Bús, E. (2015). Centers of teacher education: Setting up working standards and accreditation. In H. A. Horváth & G. Jakab (Eds.), The future of teacher education (Vol. 3, pp. 29–42). Budapest, Hungary: Research and Innovation in Education (in Hungarian). Csapó, B., & Nikolov, M. (2009). The cognitive contribution to the development of proficiency in a foreign language. Learning and Individual Differences, 19, 203–218. Csizér, K. (2010). Language learning motivation of dyslexic learners. In J. Kormos & K. Csizér (Eds.), Foreign language acquisition and specific learning difficulties (pp. 97–124). Budapest, Hungary: Eötvös Kiadó (in Hungarian). Csizér, K. (2017). Motivation in the L2 classroom. In S. Loewen & M. Sato (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of instructed second language acquisition (pp. 418–432). London, UK: Routledge. Csizér, K. (2018). Some components of language learning experiences: An interview study with English teachers in Hungary. In M. Lehmann, R. Lugossy, M. Nikolov, & G. Szabó (Eds.), UPRT2017: Empirical studies in applied linguistics (pp. 1–14). Pécs, Hungary: University of Pécs.

References

147

Csizér, K. (2019). The language learning experiences and their perceived impact on teaching: An interview study with English teachers in Hungary. In M. Sato & S. Loewen (Eds.), Evidence based second language pedagogy: A collection of instructed second language acquisition studies (pp. 314–330). New York, NY: Routledge. Csizér, K. (2019). The L2 motivational self system. In M. Lamb, K. Csizér, A. Henry, & S. Ryan (Eds.), Palgrave Macmillan handbook of motivation for language learning (pp. 71–93). Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave. Csizér, K. (2020). English teachers’ motivation: The results of an exploratory study (Doctoral dissertation). Hungarian Academy of Science, Budapest, Hungary (in Hungarian). Csizér, K., & Albert, Á. (in press). Trait and state perspectives of individual difference research. In S. Mercer & T. Gregersen (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of psychology of language learning. Abingdon, UK: Routledge. Csizér, K., & Albert, Á. (2019, October). The interrelationships of emotions and motivation: The results of two pilot studies. Presentation at IATEFL-Hungary Conference, Budapest. Csizér, K., Albert, Á., & Piniel, K. (in preparation). The interrelationship of language learning autonomy, self-efficacy, motivation and emotions: The investigation of Hungarian secondary school students. Csizér, K., & Dörnyei, Z. (2005). The internal structure of language learning motivation and its relationship with language choice and learning effort. The Modern Language Journal, 89, 19–36. Csizér, K., & Galántai, D. (2012). The role of parents and teachers in shaping secondary school students’ L2 motivation. The results of structural equation modelling. In A. Németh (Ed.), Programs of pedagogy in the doctoral school: Scientific fields and research results (pp. 171–178). Budapest, Hungary: Eötvös Kiadó (in Hungarian). Csizér, K., & Illés, É. (2020). Helping to maximize learners’ motivation for second language learning. Language Teaching Research Quartely, 71, 19–31. Csizér, K., Holló, D., & Károly, K. (Eds.). (2011). Dynamic group, dynamic learning: The role of group dynamics in language learning. Budapest, Hungary: Tinta Kiadó (in Hungarian). Csizér, K., & Kálmán, C. (Eds.). (2019a). Language learning experience: The neglected element in L2 motivation research. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching. Special Issue, 6(1). Csizér, K., & Kálmán, C. (2019b). A study of retrospective and concurrent foreign language learning experiences: A comparative interview study in Hungary. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 6, 225–246. Csizér, K., & Kontra, E. H. (2020). Foreign language learning characteristics of deaf and severely hard-of-hearing students. The Modern Language Journal, 104, 233–249. Csizér, K., Kontra, E. H., & Piniel, K. (2015). An investigation of the self-related concepts and foreign language motivation of young Deaf and hard-of-hearing learners in Hungary. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 5, 229–249. Csizér, K., Kontráné Hegybíró, E., & Sáfár, A. (2008). Foreign language leaning motivation of Deaf and hard-of-hearing adults. Magyar Pedagógia, 108, 341–357. (in Hungarian). Csizér, K., & Kormos, J. (2008a). The relationship of inter-cultural contact and language learning motivation among Hungarian students of English and German. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 29, 30–48. Csizér, K., & Kormos, J. (2008b). The role of intercultural contact in learning German in Hungary: A structural equation modelling approach. Zeitschrift für Interkulturellen Fremdsprachenunterricht, 13(2), 14S. Csizér, K., & Kormos, J. (2009a). Attitudes, selves and motivated learning behaviour: A comparative analysis of structural models for Hungarian secondary and university learners of English. In Z. Dörnyei & E. Ushioda (Eds.), Motivation, language identity and the L2 Self (pp. 98–119). Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters. Csizér, K., & Kormos, J. (2009b). Modelling the role of inter-cultural contact in the motivation of learning English as a foreign language. Applied Linguistics, 30, 166–185. Csizér, K., & Lukács, G. (2010). The comparative analysis of motivation, attitudes and selves: The case of English and German in Hungary. System, 38, 1–13.

148

References

Csizér, K., & Magid, M. (2014). The impact of self-concept on language learning. Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters. Csizér, K., & Öveges, E. (2020). Language learning autonomy and language planning: The results of a mixed-methods study. Modern Nyelvoktatás, 36(1–2), 44–58. (in Hungarian). Csizér, K., Öveges, E., & Lajtai, Á. (2020). The relationship between foreign language learning motivation and language exams: The results of a questionnaire study. In M. Lehmann, R. Lugossy, & G. Szabó (Eds.), UPRT2019: Empirical studies in applied linguistics. Pécs, Hungary: University of Pécs. Csizér, K., Pawlak, M., Szatzker, V., & Erd˝o-Bonyár, K. (in press). Tapping into self-regulation in study abroad contexts: A pilot study. In M. Howard (Ed.), Study abroad and the second language learner. London, UK: Bloomsbery Publishing. Csizér, K., Piniel, K., & Kontráné Hegybíró, E. (2015). Factors impacting the foreign language learning motivation of hearing impaired students. Magyar Pedagógia, 115, 3–18. (in Hungarian). Csizér, K., & Pohl, U. (2017). Deutsch lernen in Ungarn. Eine Zusammenfassung der Forschungsergebnisse. In H. Philipp & A. Ströbel (Eds.), Deutsch in Mittel-, Ost- und Südosteuropa (pp. 529–544). Regensburg, Germany: Verlag Friedrich Pustet. Csizér, K., & Tankó, Gy. (2017). English majors’ self-regulatory control strategy use in academic writing and its relation to L2 motivation. Applied Linguistics, 38, 368–404. Darvin, R., & Norton, B. (2015). Identity and a model of investment in applied linguistics. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 35, 36–56. de Bot, K., Lowie, W., & Verspoor, M. (2007). A dynamic systems theory approach to second language acquisition. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 10, 7–21. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behaviour. New York, NY: Plenum. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (Eds.). (2002). Handbook of self-determination. Rochester, NY: University of Rochester Press. Deci, E. L., Vallerland, R. J., Pelletier, L. G., & Ryan, R. M. (1991). Motivation and education: The self-determination perspective. Educational Psychologist, 26, 325–346. De Costa, P. I., & Norton, B. (2017). Introduction: Identity, transdisciplinarity, and the good language teacher. The Modern Language Journal, 101(Supplement), 3–14. DeKeyser, R. (2012). Interactions between individual differences, treatments, and structures in SLA. Language Learning, 62(Supplement 2), 189–200. Dér, K. (2018). Demotivation and remotivation of Hungarian learners of English: An inquiry into the causes and nature of their demotivation and remotivation (MA thesis). Eötvös University, Budapest, Hungary. D. Molnár, É. (2014). The importance of self-regulatory learning. In A. Buda & E. Golnhofer (Eds.), Studies in pedagogy, 2013: Learning and environment (pp. 29–54). Budapest, Hungary: MTA Pedagógiai Tudományos Bizottság (in Hungarian). Dörnyei, Z. (1990). Conceptualizing motivation in foreign-language learning. Language Learning, 40, 45–78. Dörnyei, Z. (1994). Motivation and motivating in the foreign language classroom. The Modern Language Journal, 78, 273–284. Dörnyei, Z. (1998a). Motivation in second and foreign language learning. Language Teaching, 31, 117–135. Dörnyei, Z. (1998b, March). Demotivation in foreign language learning. Paper presented at the TESOL ‘98 Congress, Seattle, WA. Dörnyei, Z. (2000). Motivation in action: Toward a process-oriented conceptualisation of student motivation. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 70, 519–538. Dörnyei, Z. (2001a). Teaching and researching motivation. London, UK: Longman. Dörnyei, Z. (2001b). Motivational strategies in the language classroom. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

References

149

Dörnyei, Z. (2003). Attitudes, orientations, and motivations in language learning: Advances in theory, research, and applications. In Z. Dörnyei (Ed.), Attitudes, orientations, and motivations in language learning (pp. 3–32). Oxford: Blackwell. Dörnyei, Z. (2005). The psychology of the language learner: Individual differences in second language acquisition. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Dörnyei, Z. (2007). Creating a motivating classroom environment. In J. Cummins & C. Davison (Eds.), International handbook of English language teaching (Vol. 2, pp. 719–731). New York, NY: Springer. Dörnyei, Z. (2007). Research methods in applied linguistics: Quantitative, qualitative and mixed methodologies. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. Dörnyei, Z. (2009). The psychology of second language acquisition. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. Dörnyei, Z. (2009). The L2 motivational self system. In Z. Dörnyei & E. Ushioda (Eds.), Motivation, language identity and the L2 self (pp. 9–42). Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters. Dörnyei, Z. (2014). Future self-guides and vision. In K. Csizér & M. Magid (Eds.), The impact of self-concept on language learning (pp. 7–18). Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters. Dörnyei, Z. (2019a). Psychology and language learning: The past, the present and the future. Journal for the Psychology of Language Learning, 1, 27–41. Dörnyei, Z. (2019b). From integrative motivation to directed motivational currents: The evolution of the understanding of L2 motivation over three decades In M. Lamb, K. Csizér, A. Henry & S. Ryan (Eds.), Palgrave Macmillan handbook of motivation for language learning (pp. 39–69). Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave. Dörnyei, Z. (2020). Innovations and challenges in language learning motivation. London, UK: Routledge. Dörnyei, Z., & Al-Hoorie, A. (2017). The motivational foundation of learning languages other than Global English: Theoretical issues and research directions. The Modern Language Journal, 101, 455–468. Dörnyei, Z., & Csizér, K. (1998). Ten commandments for motivating language learners: Results of an empirical study. Language Teaching Research, 2, 203–229. Dörnyei, Z., & Csizér, K. (2002). Some dynamics of language attitudes and motivation: Results of a longitudinal nationwide survey. Applied Linguistics, 23, 421–462. Dörnyei, Z., Csizér, K., & Németh, N. (2006). Motivational dynamics, language attitudes and language globalisation: A Hungarian perspective. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters. Dörnyei, Z., & Kormos, J. (2000). The role of individual and social variables in oral task performance. Language Teaching Research, 4, 275–300. Dörnyei, Z., MacIntyre, P., & Henry, A. (Eds.). (2015). Motivational dynamics in language learning. Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters. Dörnyei, Z., & Ottó, I. (1998). Motivation in action: A process model of L2 motivation. Working Papers in Applied Linguistics (Thames Valley University, London), 47, 173–210. Dörnyei, Z., & Ushioda, E. (2009). Motivation, language identity and the L2 self . Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters. Dörnyei, Z., & Ushioda, E. (2011). Teaching and researching motivation (2nd ed.). Harlow, UK: Longman. Dweck, C. S. (1996). Social motivation: Goals and social-cognitive processes. A comment. In J. Juvonen & K. R. Wentzel (Eds.), Social motivation: Understanding children’s school adjustment (pp. 181–195). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Dweck, C. S. (1999). Self-theories: Their role in motivation, personality, and development. Philadelphia, PA: Psychology Press. Dweck, C. S. (2006). Mindset: The new psychology of success. New York, NY: Random House. Eurobarometer. (2012). Europeans and their languages: Special Eurobarometer 286–Wave 71.1. Brussels: European Commission. Retrieved from http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/ eb_special_399_ 380_en.htm. Accessed February 27, 2016.

150

References

European Statistics. (2016). Education and training in Europe: Facts and figures. Brussels, Belgium: Eurostat. Retrieved from https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php? title=Foreign_language_skills_statistics#Number_of_foreign_languages_known. Accessed: 15 December 2019. Falout, J. (2012). Coping with demotivation: EFL learners’ remotivation processes. The Electronic Journal for English as a Second Language, 16(3), 1–29. Fan, X., Thompson, B., & Wang, L. (1999). The effects of sample size, estimation methods, and model specification on SEM fit indices. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 56–83. Fodor, F., & Peluau, S. (2003). Language geostrategy in eastern and central Europe: Assessment and perspectives. In J. Maurais & M. A. Morris (Eds.), Languages in a globalising world (pp. 85–98). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Freeman, D., & Richards, J. (1996). Teacher learning in language teaching. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. Fukada, Y., Falout, J., Fukuda, T., & Murphey, T. (2019). Motivational group dynamics in SLA: The interpersonal interaction imperative. In M. Lamb, K. Csizér, A. Henry, & S. Ryan (Eds.), Palgrave Macmillan handbook of motivation for language learning (pp. 307–325). Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave. Garai, O. (2016). Demotivation and remotivation in language learning (MA thesis). Eötvös University, Budapest, Hungary. Gardner, R. C. (1985). Social psychology and second language learning: The role of attitudes and motivation. London, UK: Edward Arnold. Gardner, R. C. (2001). Integrative motivation and second language acquisition. In Z. Dörnyei & R. Schmidt (Eds.), Motivation and second language acquisition (pp. 1–19). Honolulu, HI: University of Hawai’i, Second Language Teaching and Curriculum Center. Gardner, R. C. (2004). Attitude/motivation test battery: International AMTB research project: The English version. London, Canada: The University of Western Ontario. Gardner, R. C. (2006). The socio-educational model of second language acquisition: A research paradigm. In S. H. Foster-Cohen, M. Medved Krajnovi´c, & J. Mihaljevi´c Djigunovi´c (Eds.), Eurosla Yearbook Volume 6 (Annual Conference of the European Second Language Association) (pp. 237–260). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins Publishing. Gardner, R. C. (2019). The socio-educational model of second language acquisition. In M. Lamb, K. Csizér, A. Henry, & S. Ryan (Eds.), Palgrave Macmillan handbook of motivation for language learning (pp. 21–37). Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave. Gardner, R. C., & Lambert, W. E. (1959). Motivational variables in second language acquisition. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 13, 266–272. Gardner, R. C., & Lambert, W. E. (1972). Attitudes and motivation in second language learning. Rowley, MA: Newbury House. Gardner, R. C., Masgoret, A.-M., & Tremblay, P. F. (1999). Home background characteristics and second language learning. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 18, 419–437. Graham, S. (1999). Classroom motivation from attributional perspectives. In H. F. O’Neil Jr. & M. Drillings (Eds.), Motivation: Theory and research (pp. 41–59). Budapest, Hungary: Vince Kiadó. (in Hungarian). Guilloteaux, M. J., & Dörnyei, Z. (2008). Motivating language learners: A classroom-oriented investigation of the effects of motivational strategies on student motivation. TESOL Quarterly, 42, 55–77. Hadfield, J. (1992). Classroom dynamics. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. Hadfield, J., & Dörnyei, Z. (2013). Motivating learning. Harlow, UK: Longman. Hardi, J. (2011). Language learning motivation: The case of English teacher trainees. Modern Nyelvoktatás, 17(1), 58–72. (in Hungarian). Heckhausen, H. (1991). Motivation and action. New York, NY: Springer. Heckhausen, H., & Kuhl, J. (1985). From wishes to action: Dead ends and short cuts on the long way to action. In M. Frese & J. Sabini (Eds.), Goal-directed behaviour: The concept of action in psychology (pp. 134–160). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

References

151

Heitzmann, J. (2008). The ups and downs of motivation: A longitudinal study of a group of secondary-school learners of English (PhD dissertation). Eötvös University, Budapest, Hungary. Henry, A. (2010). Contexts of possibility in simultaneous language learning: Using the L2 Motivational Self System to assess the impact of global English. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 31, 149–162. Henry, A. (2011). Examining the impact of L2 English on L3 selves: A case study. International Journal of Multilingualism, 8, 235–255. Henry, A. (2014). The motivational effects of crosslinguistic awareness: Developing third language pedagogies to address the negative impact of the L2 on the L3 self-concept. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 8, 1–19. Henry, A. (2017). L2 motivation and multilingual identities. The Modern Language Journal, 101, 548–565. Henry, A. (2019). A drama of selves: Investigating teacher identity development from dialogical and complexity perspectives. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 9, 263–285. Henry, A., & Cliffordson, C. (2013). Motivation, gender, and possible selves. Language Learning, 63, 271–295. Henry, A., Sundqvist, P., & Thorsen, C. (2019). Motivational practice: Insights from the classroom. Lund, Sweden: Studentlitteratur. Henry, A., & Thorsen, C. (2019). Weaving webs of connection: Empathy, perspective taking, and students’ motivation. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 9, 31–53. Herendi, K., & Fekete, É. (2011). Group work and language learning motivation. In K. Csizér, D. Holló, & K. Károly (Eds.), Dynamic group, dynamic learning: The role of group dynamics in language learning (pp. 44–60). Budapest, Hungary: Tinta Kiadó. (in Hungarian). Higgins, E. T. (1987). Self-discrepancy: A theory of relating self and affect. Psychological Review, 94, 319–340. Hiver, P. (2013). The interplay of possible language teacher selves in professional development. Language Teaching Research, 17, 210–227. Hiver, P. (2015). Once burned, twice shy: The dynamic development of system immunity in teachers. In Z. Dörnyei, P. MacIntyre, & A. Henry (Eds.), Motivational dynamics in language learning (pp. 214–237). Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters. Hiver, P. (2016). The triumph over experience: Hope and hardiness in novice L2 teachers. In P. D. MacIntyre, T. Gregersen, & S. Mercer (Eds.), Positive psychology in SLA (pp. 168–192). Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters. Hiver, P. (2017). Tracing the signature dynamics of language teacher immunity: A retrodictive qualitative modeling study. The Modern Language Journal, 101, 669–699. Hiver, P. (2018). Teachstrong: The power of teacher resilience for L2 practitioners. In S. Mercer & A. Kostoulas (Eds.), Language teacher psychology (pp. 231–246). Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters. Hiver, P., & Dörnyei, Z. (2017). Language teacher immunity: A double-edged sword. Applied Linguistics, 38, 405–423. Howard, M. (Ed.). (2020). Study abroad and the second language learner. London, UK: Bloomsbery Publishing. Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1–55. Hungarian Central Statistical Office. (2013). Census of 2011: National data. Budapest, Hungary: Hungarian Central Statistical Office. Hüttner, J., Dalton-Puffer, C., & Smit, U. (2013). The power of beliefs: Lay theories and their influence on the implementation of CLIL programmes. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 16, 267–284. Illés, É. (1984). “Reform comments” about Russian language teaching. Pedagógiai Szemle, 34, 879–884. (in Hungarian). Illés, É. (2012). Applied linguistics: Who is it for? In É. Illés & T. Eitler (Eds.), Studies in applied linguistics in honour of Edit H. Kontra (pp. 65–73). Budapest, Hungary: ELTE BTK.

152

References

Illés, É. (2020). Understanding context in language use and teaching. New York, NY: Routledge. Illés, É., & Akcan, S. (2017). ELF awareness of prospective teachers in Hungary and Turkey. In Y. Bayyurt & N. Sifakis (Eds.), English language education policies and practices in the Mediterranean countries and beyond (pp. 181–198). Frankfurt am Main, Germany: Peter Lang Verlag. Illés, É., & Csizér, K. (2010). A questionnaire validation study investigating secondary school students’ contact experiences and dispositions to English as an international language. Working Papers in Language Pedagogy, 4, 1–22. Illés, É., & Csizér, K. (2015). The disposition of Hungarian teachers of English toward the international use of the English language. In D. Holló & K. Károly (Eds.), Inspirations in foreign language teaching: Studies in applied linguistics, language pedagogy and language teaching (pp. 170–183). London, UK: Pearson Education Limited. Illés, É., & Csizér, K. (2018). Language teachers. In E. Öveges & K. Csizér (Eds.), Foreign language learning education in Hungary: A study into primary and secondary schools (pp. 162–189). Budapest, Hungary: Education Authority Office. (in Hungarian). Irie, K., Ryan, S., & Mercer, S. (2018). Using Q methodology to investigate pre-service EFLteachers’ mindsets about teaching competences. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 8, 575–598. Islam, M., Lamb, M., & Chambers, G. (2013). The L2 Motivational Self System and national interest: A Pakistani perspective. System, 41, 231–244. Jánosházi, O., & Csizér, K. (2011). Language learning motivation and group dynamics: The impact of the group on students’ motivated behavior. In K. Csizér, D. Holló, & K. Károly (Eds.), Dynamic group, dynamic learning: The role of group dynamics in language learning (pp. 27–43). Budapest, Hungary: Tinta Kiadó. (in Hungarian). Jenkins, J. (2007). English as a lingua franca: Attitude and identity. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. Jung, S. K. (2011). Demotivating and remotivating factors in learning English: A case of low level college students. English Teaching, 66(2), 47–72. Kachru, B. B. (1992). Teaching World Englishes. In B. B. Kachru (Ed.), The other tongue: English across cultures (2nd ed., pp. 355–365). Urbana and Chicago: University of Illinois Press. Kálmán, Cs. (2018). EFL teachers’ motivation and motivational impact in corporate contexts. Journal of Adult Learning, Knowledge and Innovation, 2, 33–47. Keller, J. M. (1983). Motivational design of instruction. In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional design theories and models: An overview of their current status (pp. 383–434). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Kimura, Y. (2014). ELT motivation from a complex dynamic systems theory perspective: A longitudinal case study of L2 teachers motivation in Beijing. In K. Csizér & M. Magid (Eds.), The impact of self-concept on language learning (pp. 310–329). Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters. Kiss, Cs, & Nikolov, M. (2005). Preparing, piloting and validating an instrument to measure young learners’ aptitude. Language Learning, 55, 99–150. Kivovics, J. (2011). The role of group dynamics in the working of English language learning groups [in Hungarian]. In K. Csizér, D. Holló, & K. Károly (Eds.), Dynamic group, dynamic learning: The role of group dynamics in language learning (pp. 61–88). Budapest, Hungary: Tinta Kiadó. Kontra, E. H. (2019). The L2 motivation of learners with special educational needs. In M. Lamb, K. Csizér, A. Henry, & S. Ryan (Eds.), Palgrave Macmillan handbook of motivation for language learning (pp. 495–514). Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave. Kontra, E. H., Csizér, K., & Piniel, K. (2014). The challenge for Deaf students to learn foreign languages in special needs schools. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 30, 141–155. Kontra, E. H., Piniel, K., & Csizér, K. (2017). Deaf and hard-of-hearing university students’ dispositions toward and experiences in foreign language learning. In É. Illés & J. Sazdovska (Eds.), Looking forward, looking back (pp. 37–51) Budapest, Hungary: IATEFL.

References

153

Kontráné Hegybíró, E., Csizér, K., & Piniel, K. (2013). The investigation of individual difference variables of hearing impaired language learners: Motivation, beliefs and strategies. Alkalmazott Nyelvtudomány, 13, 5–21. (in Hungarian). Kontráné Hegybíró, E., Csizér, K., & Sáfár, A. (2008). Hungarian Deafs about the sign language: Results of a questionnaire study. Alkalmazott Nyelvtudomány, 8, 5–22. (in Hungarian). Kontráné Hegybíró, E., Csizér, K., & Sáfár, A. (2009). Foreign language learning among Deaf and hard-of-hearing individuals. Új Pedagógiai Szemle, 59(1), 72–83. (in Hungarian). Kontráné Hegybíró, E., Piniel, K., & Csizér, K. (2014). Goals, success and challenges in the language learning process of Deaf and hard-of-hearing students. Új Pedagógiai Szemle, 64(7–8), 11–26. (in Hungarian). Kormos, J., & Csizér, K. (2005). The role of milieu in foreign language learning motivation: The results of a qualitative study. Magyar Pedagógia, 105, 29–40. (in Hungarian). Kormos, J., & Csizér, K. (2007). An interview study of inter-ethnic contact and its role in language learning in a foreign language environment. System, 35, 241–258. Kormos, J., & Csizér, K. (2008). Age-related differences in the motivation of learning English as a foreign language: Attitudes, selves and motivated learning behaviour. Language Learning, 58, 327–355. Kormos, J., & Csizér, K. (Eds.). (2010). Foreign language acquisition and specific learning difficulties. Budapest, Hungary: Eötvös Kiadó. (in Hungarian). Kormos, J., & Csizér, K. (2014). The interaction of motivation, self-regulation and autonomous learner behavior in different learner groups. TESOL Quarterly, 48, 275–299. Kormos, J., & Dörnyei, Z. (2004). The interaction of linguistic and motivational variables in second language task performance. Zeitschrift für interkulturellen Fremdsprachenunterricht, 9, 2. Kormos, J., & Kiddle, T. (2013). The role of socio-economic factors in motivation to learn English as a foreign language: The case of Chile. System, 41, 399–412. Kormos, J., & Lukóczky, O. (2004). “I do not like learning English”, the absence of motivation in English language learning. In E. Kontráné Hegybíró & J. Kormos (Eds.), The language learner: Successes, methods, strategies (pp. 109–124). Budapest, Hungary: Okker Kiadó (in Hungarian). Kormos, J., & Wilby, J. (2019). Task motivation. In M. Lamb, K. Csizér, A. Henry, & S. Ryan (Eds.), Palgrave Macmillan handbook of motivation for language learning (pp. 267–285). Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave. Kubanyiova, M. (2007). Teacher development in action: An empirically-based model of promoting conceptual change in in-service language teachers in Slovakia (PhD dissertation). University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK. Kubanyiova, M. (2009). Possible selves in language teacher development. In Z. Dörnyei & E. Ushioda (Eds.), Motivation, language identity and the L2 self (pp. 314–332). Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters. Kubanyiova, M. (2015). The role of teachers’ future self guides in creating L2 development opportunities in teacher-led classroom discourse: Reclaiming the relevance of language teacher cognition. The Modern Langauge Journal, 99, 565–584. Lamb, M. (2004). “It depends on the students themselves”: Independent language learning at an Indonesian state school. Language, Culture and Curriculum, 17, 229–245. Lamb, M. (2012). A self-system perspective on young adolescents’ motivation to learn English in urban and rural settings. Language Learning, 62, 997–1023. Lamb, M., Csizér, K., Henry, A., & Ryan, S. (Eds.). (2019). Palgrave Macmillan handbook of motivation for language learning. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave. Lanvers, U., & Chambers, G. (2019). In the shadow of global English? Comparing language learner motivation in Germany and the United Kingdom. In M. Lamb, K. Csizér, A. Henry, & S. Ryan (Eds.), Palgrave Macmillan handbook of motivation for language learning (pp. 429–448). Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave. Larsen-Freeman, D. (2015). Ten ‘lessons’ from complex dynamic systems theory: What is on offer. In Z. Dörnyei, P. MacIntyre, & A. Henry (Eds.), Motivational dynamics in language learning (pp. 11–19). Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters.

154

References

Larsen-Freeman, D., & Cameron, L. (2008). Complex systems and applied linguistics. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. Little, D. (1999). Learner autonomy is more than a Western cultural construct. In S. Cotterall & D. Crabbe (Eds.), Learner autonomy in language learning: Defining the field and effecting change (pp. 11–18). Frankfurt am Main, Germany: Peter Lang Verlag. Loh, C. E., & Liew, W. M. (2016). Voices from the ground: The emotional labor of English teachers’ work. Teaching and Teacher Education, 55, 267–278. Lou, N. M., & Noels, K. A. (2019). Language mindsets, meaning-making, and motivation. In M. Lamb, K. Csizér, A. Henry, & S. Ryan (Eds.), Palgrave Macmillan handbook of motivation for language learning (pp. 537–559). Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave. Mackay, J. (2014). Applications and implications of the L2 Motivational Self System in a Catalan EFL context. In K. Csizér & M. Magid (Eds.), The impact of self-concept on language learning (pp. 377–400). Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters. MacIntyre, P. D., Clément, R., Dörnyei, Z., & Noels, K. A. (1998). Conceptualizing willingness to communicate in a L2: A situational model of L2 confidence and affiliation. The Modern Language Journal, 82, 545–562. MacIntyre, P., & Serroul, A. (2015). Motivation on a per-second timescale: Examining approachavoidance motivation during L2 task performance. In Z. Dörnyei, P. MacIntyre, & A. Henry (Eds.), Motivational dynamics in language learning (pp. 109–138). Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters. Magid, M. (2014). A motivational programme for learners of English: An application of the L2 Motivational Self System. In K. Csizér & M. Magid (Eds.), The impact of self-concept on language learning (pp. 333–356). Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters. Markus, H., & Nurius, P. (1986). Possible selves. American Psychologist, 41, 954–969. Medgyes, P. (2017a). The non-native teacher. Callander, UK: Swan Communication Ltd. Medgyes, P. (2017b). The ventriloquist—I’m a (relatively) happy teacher. English, 6–12. Medgyes, P., & Nikolov, M. (2014). Research in foreign language education in Hungary (2006– 2012). Language Teaching, 47, 504–537. Menyhárt, A. (2008). Teachers or lecturers? The motivational profile of university teachers of English. Working Papers in Language Pedagogy, 2, 119–137. Mercer, S. (2016). Seeing the world through your eyes: Empathy in language learning and teaching. In P. D. MacIntyre, T. Gregersen, & S. Mercer (Eds.), Positive psychology in SLA (pp. 91–111). Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters. Mercer, S., & Ryan, S. (2010). A mindset for EFL: Learners’ beliefs about the role of natural talent. ELT Journal, 64(4), 436–444. Mérei, F. (2004). The hidden networks of communities. Budapest, Hungary: Osiris (in Hungarian). Mihaljevi´c Djigunovi´c, J., & Nikolov, M. (2019). Motivation of young learners of foreign languages. In M. Lamb, K. Csizér, A. Henry, & S. Ryan (Eds.), Palgrave Macmillan handbook of motivation for language learning (pp. 515–533). Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave. Mills, N., Pajares, F., & Herron, C. (2007). Self-efficacy of college intermediate French students: Relation to achievement and motivation. Language Learning, 57, 417–442. Mitchell, R., & Tyne, H. (Eds.). (in press). Language and mobility: Study abroad in the contemporary European context. London, UK: Routledge. Moodie, I., & Feryok, A. (2014). Beyond cognition to commitment: English language teaching in South Korean primary schools. The Modern Language Journal, 99, 450–460. Nádori, G. (2012). Gamification—course material, PIL Academy.http://bit.ly/1dWcK5J (in Hungarian). National Core Curriculum. (2012). National Core Curriculum. Magyar Közlöny, 66, 10635–10847 (in Hungarian). Nikolov, M. (1999). “Why do you learn English?” “Because the teacher is short”. A study of Hungarian children’s foreign language motivation. Language Teaching Research, 3, 33–56.

References

155

Nikolov, M. (2001). A study of unsuccessful language learners. In Z. Dörnyei & R. Schmidt (Eds.), Motivation and second language acquisition (pp. 149–170). Honolulu, HI: The University of Hawaii, Second Language Teaching and Curriculum Center. Nikolov, M. (2003). Attitudes and motivation of English and German learners. Iskolakultúra, 13(8), 61–73. (in Hungarian). Nikolov, M. (2008). “Primary school means methodology!” An empirical study on lower-primary EFL classes. Modern Nyelvoktatás, 14(1–2), 3–19. (in Hungarian). Nikolov, M., & Csapó, B. (2018). The relationships between 8th graders’ L1 and L2 reading skills, inductive reasoning and socio-economic status in early English and German as a foreign language programs. System, 73, 48–57. Nikolov, M., & Józsa, K. (2006). Relationships between language achievements in English and German and classroom-related variables. In M. Nikolov & J. Horváth (Eds.), UPRT 2006: Empirical studies in English applied linguistics (pp. 197–224). Pécs: Lingua Franca Csoport. Nikolov, M., & Nagy, E. (2003). “I have been learning for many years without getting anywhere”: The language learning experiences of adults. Modern Nyelvoktatás, 9(1), 14–40. (in Hungarian). Nikolov, M., Ottó, I., & Öveges, E. (2009). An overview of the year of intensive language learning 2004/2005—2008/2009. Budapest, Hungarian: Ministry of Education and Culture. Noels, K. (2001). New orientations in language learning motivation: Toward a model of intrinsic extrinsic, and integrative orientations and motivations. In Z. Dörnyei & R. Schmidt (Eds.), Motivation and second language acquisition (pp. 43–68). Honolulu, HI: The University of Hawai’i, Second Language & Curriculum Center. Noels, K. (2001). Learning Spanish as a second language: Learners’ orientations and perceptions of their teachers’ communicative style. Language Learning, 51, 107–144. Noels, K., Clément, R., & Pelletier, L. G. (1999). Perceptions of teachers’ communicative style and students’ intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. The Modern Language Journal, 83, 23–34. Noels, K., Clément, R., & Pelletier, L. G. (2001). Intrinsic, extrinsic, and integrative orientations of French Canadian learners of English. Canadian Modern Language Review, 57, 424–442. Noels, K. A., Lou, M. N., Vargas Lascano, D. I., Chaffee, K. E., Dincer, A., Zhang, Y., & Zhang, X. (2019). Self-determination and motivated engagement in language learning. In M. Lamb, K. Csizér, A. Henry, & S. Ryan (Eds.), Palgrave Macmillan handbook of motivation for language learning (pp. 95–115). Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave. Noels, K., Pelletier, L. G., Clément, R., & Vallerand, R. J. (2000). Why are you learning a second language? Motivational orientation and self-determination theory. Language Learning, 50, 57–85. Norton, B. (2017). Learner investment and language teacher identity. In G. Barkhuizen (Ed.), Reflections on language teacher identity (pp. 80–86). London, UK: Routledge. Oxford, R. (1998, March). The unravelling tapestry: Teacher and course characteristics associated with demotivation in the language classroom. Demotivation in foreign language learning. Paper presented at the TESOL ‘98 Congress, Seattle, WA. Öveges, E. (2018). Foreign language teaching in Hungarian schools. In E. Öveges & K. Csizér (Eds.), Foreign language learning education in Hungary: A study into primary and secondary schools (pp. 13–28). Budapest, Hungary: Education Authority Office. (in Hungarian). Öveges, E., & Csizér, K. (2018). Foreign language learning education in Hungary: A study into primary and secondary schools. Budapest: Oktatási Hivatal. (in Hungarian). Öveges, E., & Kuti, Zs. (2016). What are the problems of language teaching?. Budapest, Hungary: Nyelvtudásért Egyesület. (in Hungarian). Papi, M., & Abdollahzadeh, E. (2012). Teacher motivational practice, student motivation, and possible L2 selves: An examination in the Iranian EFL context. Language Learning, 62, 571–594. Park, H., & Hiver, P. (2017). Profiling and tracing motivational change in project-based L2 learning. System, 67, 50–64. Pawlak, M. (2012). The dynamic nature of motivation in language learning: A classroom perspective. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 2, 249–278. Pawlak, M., & Csizér, K. (in press). Self-regulatory strategy use and its impact on motivated learning behavior and self-efficacy in European study abroad contexts. In R. Mitchell & H. Tyne (Eds.),

156

References

Language and mobility: Study abroad in the contemporary European context. London, UK: Routledge. Pawlak, M., Csizér, K., & Soto, A. (2020). Interrelationships of motivation, self-efficacy and selfregulatory strategy use: An investigation into study abroad experiences. System, 93. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.system.2020.102300. Pekrun, R. (2014). Emotions and learning (Educational Practices Series, Vol. 24). International Academy of Education (IAE) and International Bureau of Education (IBE) of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), Geneva, Switzerland. Pettigrew, T. F. (1998). Intergroup contact theory. Annual Review of Psychology, 49, 65–85. Pettigrew, T. F., & Tropp, L. R. (2006). A meta-analytic test of intergroup contact theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90, 751–783. Pfenninger, S. E., & Singleton, D. (2017). Beyond age effects in instructional L2 learning: Revisiting the age factor. Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters. Piniel, K. (2006). Foreign language classroom anxiety: A classroom perspective In M. Nikolov & J. Horvath (Eds.), Empirical Studies in English Applied Linguistics: UPRT 2006 (pp. 39–58). Pécs, Hungary: Lingua Franca Csoport. Piniel, K. (2010). Structural and comparative evidence for the validity of the Hungarian input, process and output anxiety scales. In É. Illés & T. Eitler (Eds.), Studies in applied linguistics in honour of Edit H. Kontra (pp. 107–122). Budapest, Hungary. Piniel, K., & Albert, Á. (2018). Advanced learners’ foreign language-related emotions across the four skills. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 8, 127–147. Piniel, K., & Csizér, K. (2013). L2 motivation, anxiety and self-efficacy: The interrelationship of individual variables in the secondary school context. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 3, 523–546. Piniel, K., & Csizér, K. (2015). Changes in motivation, anxiety, and self-efficacy during the course of an academic writing seminar. In Z. Dörnyei, P. D. MacIntyre, & A. Henry (Eds.), Motivational dynamics in language learning (pp. 164–194). Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters. Piniel, K., Kontra, E. H., & Csizér, K. (2016). Foreign language teachers at schools for Deaf and hardof-hearing students. In E. Domagała-Zy´sk & E. H. Kontra (Eds.), English as a foreign language for Deaf and hard-of-hearing persons: Challenges and strategies (pp. 73–89). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Scholar Publishing. Prievara, T. (2015). The 21st century teacher. Budapest, Hungary: Neteducatio Kft. (in Hungarian). Prievara, T. (2019). Digital classroom by a few mouse clicks.http://tanarblog.hu/cikk/digitalis-osz talyterem-par-kattintassal. Reinders, H., & Lázáro, N. (2011). Beliefs, identity and motivation in implementing autonomy: The teacher’s perspective. In G. Murray, X. Gao, & T. Lamb (Eds.), Identity, motivation and autonomy in language learning (pp. 125–142). Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters. Ryan, S. (2019). Motivation as an individual difference. In M. Lamb, K. Csizér, A. Henry, & S. Ryan (Eds.), Palgrave Macmillan handbook of motivation for language learning (pp. 163–182). London, UK: Palgrave. Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55, 68–78. Sahakyan, T., Lamb, M., & Chambers, G. (2018). Language teacher motivation: From the ideal to the feasible self. In S. Mercer & A. Kostoulas (Eds.), Language teacher psychology (pp. 53–70). Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters. Sasaki, M., Kozaki, Y., & Ross, S. J. (2017). The impact of normative environments on learner motivation and L2 reading ability growth. The Modern Language Journal, 101, 163–178. Sato, M., & Csizér, K. (in press). Introduction to combining learner psychology and ISLA research: Intersections in the classroom. Language Teaching Research. Schiller, E. (submitted for publication). Factors influencing senior learners’ language learning motivation. A Hungarian perspective. Journal of Adult Learning, Knowledge and Innovation. Seidlhofer, B. (2009). Common ground and different realities: World Englishes and English as a lingua franca. World Englishes, 28, 236–245.

References

157

Seidlhofer, B. (2011). Understanding English as a lingua franca. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. Smid, D. (2018). Hungarian pre-service teachers’ motivation to become English teachers: Validating a questionnaire. Journal of Adult Learning, Knowledge and Innovation, 2, 19–32. Smid, D. (in preparation). The internal structure of Hungarian pre-service teachers’ motivation to become EFL teachers in terms of affects, cognitions, and motives (PhD dissertation). Eötvös University, Budapest, Hungary. Stranger-Johannessen, E., & Norton, B. (2017). The African storybook and language teacher identity in digital times. The Modern Language Journal, 101(Supplement 2017), 45–60. Sugita McEown, M., & Takeuchi, O. (2014). Motivational strategies in EFL classrooms: How do teachers impact students’ motivation? Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 8, 20–38. Szénásiné Steiner, R. (2007). Developing independent learning in foreign language teaching (PhD dissertation). Eötvös University, Budapest, Hungary (in Hungarian). Szénich, A., & Szokács, K. (2017). Can I study on my own? Investigation of students’ independent learning abilities and willingness in higher education. In Á. Dévény & Á. Loch (Eds.), Innovative approaches in higher education: motivation and success (pp. 25–41). Budapest, Hungary: Budapesti Gazdasági Egyetem. Szrogh, B. (2020). Language teacher motivation: A comparison of English and German teachers in Hungary (MA thesis). Eötvös University, Budapest, Hungary. Szrogh, B., & Csizér, K. (in press). The role of attitudes, selves and experiences in shaping foreign language teachers’ motivation: The comparative results of three questionnaire studies. In C. Kálmán (Ed.), DEAL 2020: A snapshot in diversity in applied linguistics. Budapest, Hungary: Eötvös University. Tartsayné Németh, N., Tiboldi, T., & Katona, L. (2018). Answers of the heads of school. In E. Öveges & K. Csizér (Eds.), Foreign language learning education in Hungary: A study into primary and secondary schools (pp. 29–51). Budapest, Hungary: Education Authority Office. (in Hungarian). Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (2009). Foundations of mixed methods research: Integrating quantitative and qualitative approaches in the social and behavioral sciences. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. The Douglas Fir Group. (2016). A transdisciplinary framework for SLA in a multilingual world. The Modern Language Journal, 100(Supplement 2016), 19–47. Thompson, A. S., & Vásquez, C. (2015). Exploring motivational profiles through language learning narratives. The Modern Language Journal, 99, 158–174. Thorsen, C., Henry, A., & Cliffordson, C. (2017). The case of a missing person? The current L2 self and the L2 Motivational Self System. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 23, 584–600. Tóth, K. (2011). The role of group dynamics in foreign language learning processes of beginner students. In K. Csizér, D. Holló, & K. Károly (Eds.), Dynamic group, dynamic learning: The role of group dynamics in language learning (pp. 114–139). Budapest, Hungary: Tinta Kiadó. (in Hungarian). Tóth, Zs. (2010). Foreign language anxiety and the advanced language learner: A study of Hungarian students of English as a foreign language. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Scholars Publishing. Toptsi, J. E. (2018). The impact of digital media use of the L2 motivation self system (MA thesis). Eötvös University, Budapest, Hungary. Trang, T. T. T., & Baldauf, R. B. (2007). Demotivation: Understanding resistance to English language learning—The case of Vietnamese students. The Journal of Asia TEFL, 4(1), 79–105. Tremblay, P. F., & Gardner, R. C. (1995). Expanding the motivation construct in language learning. The Modern Language Journal, 79, 505–518. Tremblay, P. F., Goldberg, M. P., & Gardner, R. C. (1995). Trait and state motivation and the acquisition of Hebrew vocabulary. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, 27, 356–370.

158

References

Ushioda, E. (1998). Effective motivational thinking: A cognitive theoretical approach to the study of language learning motivation. In E. A. Soler & V. C. Espurz (Eds.), Current issues in English language methodology (pp. 77–89). Castelló de la Plana, Spain: Universitat Jaume I. Ushioda, E. (2001). Language learning at university: Exploring the role of motivational thinking. In Z. Dörnyei & R. Schmidt (Eds.), Motivation and second language acquisition (pp. 93–125). Honolulu, HI: University of Hawai’i, Second Language Teaching & Curriculum Center. Ushioda, E. (2008). Motivation and good language learners. In C. Griffiths (Ed.), Lessons from good language learners (pp. 19–34). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Ushioda, E. (2017). The impact of global English on motivation to learn other languages: Toward an ideal multilingual self. The Modern Language Journal, 101, 469–482. Ushioda, E., & Dörnyei, Z. (2017). Beyond global English: Motivation to learn languages in a multicultural world (introduction to the special issue). The Modern Language Journal, 101, 451–454. Vámos, Á. (2008). The history and present of bilingual education: The language-political problems. Budapest, Hungary: Nemzeti Tankönyvkiadó. (in Hungarian). Vukics, G. (2011). The impact of relationships in the group on language learning: The investigation of four secondary grammar school groups. In K. Csizér, D. Holló, & K. Károly (Eds.), Dynamic group, dynamic learning: The role of group dynamics in language learning (pp. 87–113). Budapest, Hungary: Tinta Kiadó. (in Hungarian). Watts, S., & Stenner, P. (2007). Q methodology: The inverted factor technique. The Irish Journal of Psychology, 28(1–2), 63–76. Weiner, B. (1984). Principles for a theory of student motivation and their application within an attributional framework. In R. Ames & C. Ames (Eds.), Research on motivation in education: Student motivation (Vol. 1, pp. 15–38). San Diego, CA: Academic Press. Weiner, B. (1992). Human motivation: Metaphors, theories and research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Waninge, F., Dörnyei, Z., & de Bot, K. (2014). Motivational dynamics in language learning: Change, stability and context. The Modern Language Journal, 98, 704–723. Widdowson, H. G. (2003). Defining issues in English language teaching. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. Williams, M., & Burden, L. R. (1997). Psychology for language teachers. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Wolff, D., & De Costa, P. I. (2017). Expanding the language teacher identity landscape: An investigation of the emotions and strategies of a NNEST. The Modern Language Journal, 101(Supplement 2017), 76–90. Yashima, T. (2000). Orientations and motivation in foreign language learning: A study of Japanese college students. JACET Bulletin, 31, 121–133. You, C. J., Dörnyei, Z., & Csizér, K. (2016). Motivation, vision, and gender: A survey of learners of English in China. Language Learning, 66, 94–123. Zimmerman, B. J. (2000). Self-efficacy: An essential motive to learn. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 82–91.