Hungary was the first important study on motivational strategies. Following Dörnyei and Csizér (1998), a few similar studies have been carried out in this realm. 250 Iranian EFL teachers participated in this study and they were asked to rate a list of comprehensive 48 motivational strategies in terms of (1) how much importance, Importance Questionnaire, they attached to these and (2) how often, Frequency Questionnaire, they implemented them in their real teaching practice. The Persian version of the questionnaires was used in this study. The results provide evidence that some strategies like “displaying appropriate teacher behaviors” and “familiarising learners with L2-related values” were ranked first and tenth respectively in both questionnaires. Among ten macro-strategies derived from both questionnaires, some scales like two aforementioned ones are culture specific and can transfer across cultures but some other scales like “Creating a pleasant classroom climate” are culture dependent and vary from culture to culture. Also, comparing the results of two questionnaires revealed that teachers’ attitudes to the Importance of motivational strategies have no relationship with their answers to their actual Frequency of use in real EFL classes.

Table of Contents

CHAPTER ONE- INTRODUCTION 1

1.1. Overview 2

1.2.Statement of the Problem 3

1.3.Significance of the Study 5

1.4.Research Questions 6

1.5.Definition of Key Terms 7

1.6. Limitations of the study 8

CHAPTER TWO- REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE 10

2.1.Overview 11

2.2.Conceptualizations of Motivation 11

2.3.The Influential Theories of L2 Motivation 13

2.3.1. The Social-Psychological Period (1959-1990) 14

2.3.1.1. Gardner’s Social-Psychological Theory 14

2.3.1.2. Keller’s (1983) Motivational-Design Model 20

2.3.2. The Cognitive-Situated Period (1990-2000) 21

2.3.2.1.Dörnyei’s (1994) Framework of L2 Motivation 22

2.3.2.2. Williams and Burden’s (1997) Model of L2 Motivation 25

2.3.2.3. Task Motivation 27

Table of Contents

CHAPTER ONE- INTRODUCTION 1

1.1. Overview 2

1.2.Statement of the Problem 3

1.3.Significance of the Study 5

1.4.Research Questions 6

1.5.Definition of Key Terms 7

1.6. Limitations of the study 8

CHAPTER TWO- REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE 10

2.1.Overview 11

2.2.Conceptualizations of Motivation 11

2.3.The Influential Theories of L2 Motivation 13

2.3.1. The Social-Psychological Period (1959-1990) 14

2.3.1.1. Gardner’s Social-Psychological Theory 14

2.3.1.2. Keller’s (1983) Motivational-Design Model 20

2.3.2. The Cognitive-Situated Period (1990-2000) 21

2.3.2.1.Dörnyei’s (1994) Framework of L2 Motivation 22

2.3.2.2. Williams and Burden’s (1997) Model of L2 Motivation 25

2.3.2.3. Task Motivation 27

2.3.2.4. L2 Motivation Expectancy-Value Theories 28

2.3.2.4.1. The Concepts of Self-Confidence and Linguistic Self-Confidence 29

2.3.2.4.2. Language Anxiety 31

2.3.2.4.3. Attribution Theory of L2 Learning 32

2.3.2.5. Achievement Motivation Theory 33

2.3.2.6. Self-Determination Theory (SDT) 34

2.3.3. The Process-Oriented Period (2000 Onwards) 36

2.3.3.1.Dörnyei and Ottó’s (1998) Process Model of L2 Motivation 36

2.4. Significance of Motivation/ L2 Motivation 39

2.5. Types of Motivation and their Role in SL/FL Acquisition 40

2.5.1. Integrative Motivation 40

2.5.2. Instrumental Motivation 42

2.5.3. Intrinsic Motivation 43

2.5.3.1. The Intrinsic Needs of Students 44

2.5.3.1.1. The Need for Autonomy and Self-Determination 45

2.5.3.1.2. The Need for Competence 45

2.5.3.1.3. The Need for Belonging and Relatedness 46

2.5.3.1.4. The Need for Self-Esteem 46

2.5.3.1.5. The Need for Involvement and Enjoyment 46

2.5.3.2. Achieving Intrinsic Motivation in L2 Learning 47

2.5.3.3. The Role of Intrinsic Motivation in L2 Learning 47

2.5.4. Extrinsic Motivation 48

2.6. The L2 Motivational Self System 51

2.7. Motivational Strategies 53

2.7.1. Creating Basic Motivational Conditions 59

2.7.1.1. Demonstrating Proper Teacher Behaviour 59

2.7.1.1.1. Teacher’s Enthusiasm 59

2.7.1.1.2. Teacher’s Commitment 62

2.7.1.1.3. Teacher’s Care and Acceptance 63

2.7.1.1.4. Teacher’s Immediacy 65

2.7.1.2. Creating a Pleasant Classroom Atmosphere 66

2.7.1.3. Promoting Group Cohesiveness and Setting Group Norms 67

2.7.2.Generating Initial Motivation 70

2.7.2.1. Familiarising Learners with L2 Culture and L2 Related Values 70

2.7.2.2. Increasing Learners’ Expectancy of Success 71

2.7.2.3. Promoting Learners’ Positive Goals (Goal-Orientedness) and Realistic Beliefs 74

2.7.2.4. Relating Language Learning to Learners’ Needs and Goals 77

2.7.3. Maintaining and Protecting Motivation 78

2.7.3.1. Making Learning Stimulating and Enjoyable 78

2.7.3.2. Diminishing Learners’ Anxiety and Building up Their Self-Confidence 79

2.7.3.3. Promoting Learners’ Autonomy 82

2.7.4. Encouraging Positive Self-Evaluation 83

2.7.4.1. Promoting Learners’ Motivational Attributions 83

2.7.4.2. Providing Learners with Motivational Feedback 85

2.7.4.3. Increasing Learners’ Satisfaction 86

2.8. Current Status of English in Iran 90

CHAPTER THREE- METHOD 92

3.1. Overview 93

3.2. Participants 93

3.3. Instruments 94

3.4. Design 95

3.5.Procedure 95

3.5.1.Piloting 95

3.5.2.Data collection 96

3.6. Data Analysis 97

CHAPTER FOUR- RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 101

4.1. Overview 102

4.2. Research Question 1 102

4.2.1. Results 102

4.2.2. Discussions 109

4.3. Research Question 2 110

4.3.1. Results 110

4.3.2. Discussions 111

4.4. Research Question 3 112

4.4.1. Results 112

4.4.2. Discussions 114

4.5. Research Question 4 115

4.5.1. Results 115

4.5.2. Discussions 117

CHAPTER FIVE-CONCLUSION, PEDAGOGICAL IMPLICATIONS AND SUGGESTIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH 118

5.1. Overview 119

5.2. Conclusion 119

5.3.Pedagogical Implications 121

5.4.Suggestions for Further research 126

References 137

List of Appendixes

Appendix 1: English version of Frequency Questionnaires 127

Appendix 2: English version of Importance Questionnaires 130

Appendix 3: Farsi version of Frequency Questionnaires 133

Appendix 4: Farsi version of Importance Questionnaires 135

List of Tables

Table 3.1. Gender of Participants 93

Table 3.2. EFL Teaching Experience of Participants 93

Table 3.3. Importance and Frequency Survey Results: Descriptive Statistics and Rankings of Ten Macro-strategies and Related Strategies 99

Table 4.1. Importance Questionnaires Results: Descriptive Statistics and Rankings of Ten Macro-strategies and Related Strategies 103

Table 4.2. Comparison of the Final Rank Order of the Macro-strategies/scales Obtained in This Study and in Hungary (1998), Taiwan (2007) 110

Table 4.3. Frequency Questionnaires Results: Descriptive Statistics and Rankings of Ten Macro-strategies and Related Strategies 112

Table 4.4. Pearson Correlation Results between Overall Means of Motivational Strategies of the Importance and Frequency Questionnaires 115

Table 4.5. Pearson Correlation Results between Macro and Micro-strategies of the Importance and Frequency Questionnaires 116

List of Figures

Figure 2.1. Gardner’s (1985) Socio-Educational Model of Second Language Acquisition (Gardner, 1985, p.199) 15

Figure 2.2. Components of Gardner’s Attitude/Motivation Test Battery (AMTB) (Gardner, 1985, 144) 17

Figure 2.3. Tremblay and Gardner’s (1995) Model of L2 Motivation (cited in Dörnyei& Ushioda, 2011, p.48 19

Figure 2.4. Dörnyei’s (1994) Model of L2 Motivation (Dörnyei, 1994a, p.280) 24

Figure 2.5. Williams and Burden’s (1997) Framework of L2 Motivation (cited in Dörnyei & Ushioda, 2011, p.54) 26

Figure 2.6. Schematic Representation of the Three Mechanisms Making up the Motivational Task- Processing System (cited in Dörnyei & Ushioda, 2011, p.96) 28

Figure 2.7. Dörnyei and Ottó’s (1998) Process Model of L2 Motivation (Dörnyei and Ottó, 1998, p.48) 38

Figure 2.8. Gardner’s Conceptualisation of the Integrative Motivation (Gardner, 1986, p.87) 41

Figure 2.9. Dörnyei’s L2 Motivational Self System (cited in Dörnyei & Usioda, 2011, p. 52) 52

Figure 2.10. The Components of Motivational L2 Teaching Practice (cited in Dörnyei & Ushioda, 2011, p.108) 58

Figure 2.11. Knight’s (2006) Model of Teacher’s Credibility (Dörnyei & Ushioda, 2011, p.108) 61

List of Abbreviations

TEFL: Teaching English as a Foreign Language

ESL: English as a Second Language

EFL: English as a Foreign Language

SL: Second Language

FL: Foreign Language

L2: Second Language

SDT: Self-Determination Theory

AMTB: Attitude/Motivation Test Battery

ARCS: Attention, Relevance, Confidence, Satisfaction

CET: Cognitive Evaluation Theory

ESOL: English for Speakers of Other Languages

MOLT: Motivation Orientation of Language Teaching

COLT: Communication Orientation of Language Teaching

LSP: Language for Specific Purposes

NO: Number

M: Mean

SD: Standard Deviation

Diff: Difference

Corr.: Correlation

Sig.: Significance

CHAPTER ONE- INTRODUCTION

1.1. Overview

In the field of second or foreign language (L2) teaching and learning, motivation is a significant factor that leads to the language learners’ success or failure. Motivation is the most used concept for explaining the failure or success of a learner. Dörnyei (1998) claimed that motivation is a key to learning. It is an inner source, desire, emotion, reason, need, impulse or purpose that moves a person to a particular action. Motivation has been regarded as one of the main factors that influence the speed and amount of success of foreign language learners. This issue seems to be highly related to the educational context of Iran where it is seen that many Iranian learners of English as a Foreign Language (EFL) fail to reach at least an average level of proficiency in English. As Dörnyei (2001b) claims, motivation is not a concrete concept; it is an abstract and hypothetical concept that is used to explain why people think and behave in certain situations as they do.

Students’ lack of motivation in language leaning contexts is a major problem for language teachers. According to Dörnyei (as cited in Marie-Jose´ Guilloteaux, 2013), a lot of researchers have tried to help teachers find ways of motivating language learners. In spite of the studies which have been done in this regard, the cultural and ethno-linguistic differences in various contexts were one of the important motives of doing this research.

Accordingly, the aim of this research is to evaluate (a) the extent to which a list of motivational strategies derived from Western educational contexts are perceived as relevant by Iranian EFL teachers and (b) the cross-cultural validity of those motivational strategies. To this effect, the present study builds on Dörnyei and Csizér ’s (1998) initial investigation in Hungary and on its modified replication conducted in Taiwan(Cheng and Dörnyei, 2007) and strives to find out how the same concept functions in Iran.

1.2. Statement of the Problem

Regarding the complex nature of motivation and its remarkable influence in second and foreign (L2) language learning, there are a growing number of studies focusing on motivation and motivational strategies in language teaching and learning settings. Dörnyei (as cited in Marie-Jose´ Guilloteaux, 2013) believes that until the early 1990s, most of the researchers studied motivation from a social psychological perspective. Much of the research in this period has been initiated and inspired by two Canadian psychologists, Robert Gardner and Wallace Lambert, who, together with their colleagues and students, grounded motivation research in a social psychological framework. Gardner and his associates also established scientific research procedures and introduced standardized assessment techniques and instruments, thus setting high research standards and bringing L2 motivation research to development (Ellis, 2008). Although Gardner’s motivation construct did not go unchallenged over the years, it was not until the early 1990s that a marked shift in thought appeared in papers on L2 motivation as researchers tried to reopen the research agenda in order to shed new light on the subject. The main problem with Gardner’s social psychological approach appeared to be, ironically, that it was too influential. While acknowledging unanimously the fundamental importance of the Gardnerian social psychological model, researchers were also calling for a more pragmatic, education-centered approach to motivation research, which would be consistent with the perceptions of practicing teachers and which would also be in line with the current results of