Social Motivation: Discovering ELLs’ Motivating Relationships

By Allison Tinch

Introduction
Most teachers recognize that student success is not solely determined by their classroom efforts; it is significantly influenced by students' family and community as well. The present study aims to address gaps in previous research by exploring the role of family and home culture in shaping the motivation of adult English Language Learners (ELLs) in a community-based English as a Second Language (ESL) context.

Literature Review
Extensive research has been conducted to comprehend motivation as it relates to language learning. Researchers have defined motivation in various ways, with Gardner's (1985) foundational definition evolving into more intricate models. While there is no unanimous agreement on a single motivation model, it is widely acknowledged that motivation is complex and dynamic (Dörnyei, 2005; Kozaki & Ross, 2011; Bo & Fu, 2018; Hiver & Larsen-Freeman, 2020; Papi & Hiver, 2020). Ushioda (2009) emphasizes the importance of a "person-in-context" approach, where motivation stems from real individuals embodied with complex social identities and embedded in cultural contexts.

Within the realm of motivation lies intrinsic motivation, with autonomy, competence, and relatedness serving as foundational psychological needs. Of these, relatedness underscores the necessity for secure relationships with others to facilitate exploration of the unfamiliar. Significant individuals in an ELL's life are implicated in the learner’s motivation, either fostering an encouraging learning environment or creating a demotivating atmosphere (Noels, 2001).

In a qualitative case study, Hann (2017) explored the role of family in the experiences of adult migrant ELLs attending vocational classes with ESL support in colleges in Yorkshire, UK. Both brainstorming and ranking activities and interviews affirmed the significance of family, with participants frequently citing their family's role in their language success. Participants spontaneously mentioned family more often than the classroom and only one participant did not mention family at all as a factor for language success. Family members, including children, spouses, in-laws, and other extended family, functioned as interlocuters and supporters, predominantly facilitating English interactions outside the classroom. As interlocuters, family members scaffolded language to assist with acquisition. Participants also reported using English in their homes with family members that do not share their L1. Interactions with these family members took the form of either direct development of language skills or motivational input. Family members were capable of influencing learners positively or negatively and played three key roles: pastoral, motivation, and interactional.

There are gaps in this understanding, however, as Hann's research focused on a specific group of ELLs, but English learners are highly diverse. To delve deeper into this topic, similar research was conducted to address the research question: What is the relationship between family and the learning motivation of adult ESL learners at a community college in Central Illinois?

Methodology and Procedure
Two classes participated in a brainstorming and ranking activity. The first class consisted of six students, five females and one male, representing Benin, India, China, Peru, and Russia. In the second class, six students, three females and three males, participated and were from Mexico and Honduras.

A curriculum-based activity was employed to generate conversation among students regarding factors contributing to English language improvement. Students were provided with blank index cards and asked, "What helps you improve your English?" They were instructed that responses could include people, items, or activities, with only one example of each type provided to avoid influencing their thinking. Students individually wrote helpful factors on cards, using as many cards as needed.

After completing their responses, students were grouped together, where they combined and categorized their responses into clusters of similar items. For instance, responses like "watch YouTube," "watch movies," and "watch TV" were grouped together. Groups then shared their factor groupings with the class. Commonalities between the groups were merged to simplify the list into primary helpful factors: six for Class One and eight for Class Two. Using the master list, students ranked the factors from most important (1) to least important (6/8). Participants shared their rankings with the class and engaged in discussions to identify similarities and differences between their lists. The researcher collected the factor cards and ranking lists for analysis. Each individual response item was categorized by the researcher to ascertain the frequency and type of factors mentioned, and the frequency and rankings were compared.

Results
Class One produced 40 individual factors, which were synthesized into six categories: class, technology, independent practice, talking in community, jobs, and family. Independent practice was the most frequently mentioned factor, while technology, family, and jobs were mentioned less frequently.

Class discussions, as observed by the researcher, revealed differences in students' perceptions of the importance of each factor. In individual rankings, all students placed the highest importance on factors involving people around them. Three students ranked community as either 1 or 2, two students ranked family as either 1 or 2, and four students ranked class as either 1 or 2. For three students, family received the lowest ranking. Those who spoke most about family or the importance of family were those married to Americans (3 of the 6 students). The students married to Americans ranked family overall as 1, 2, or 6. Despite ranking family the lowest, the one student with a native English-speaking partner still frequently cited her spouse in conversation. In contrast, students without Americans or native English speakers in their family ranked family as less important, with community interactions playing a more significant role.

Class Two generated 37 individual factors, which were synthesized into eight groupings: watching content in English, writing, reading, listening to music, speaking (work and family), using phone apps, asking questions, and paying attention in class. Speaking had the highest frequency, followed by reading.

As with Class One, discussion revealed differences in student perception of each factor’s importance. Consistent with the frequency rankings, speaking in some form ranked high among students, with four students ranking it as either 1 or 2. Reading also ranked as 1 or 2 for three students. Asking questions either fell at the bottom of the list or did not make the list at all.

Half of the students in Class Two (3 out of 6) mentioned talking to their children, while others frequently mentioned conversing with colleagues at work. Unlike Class One, most Class Two students worked outside their homes. The inclusion of "asking questions" and "paying attention" factors did not specify whom they directed their inquiries to or paid attention to, but they indicated sources of knowledge students relied on for assistance in learning.

Conclusions and Suggestions for Future Research
The two participating classes yielded distinct results that reflected the influence of family, community, and workplace environments of each class. Students with English-speaking family members acknowledged their impact on language practice, while those integrated into English-speaking work communities viewed these communities as beneficial for improving their English. Conversely, students without family or work communities found practice among peers or the broader English-speaking community. Consuming and producing language in relationship with others played a pivotal role in language improvement, and while the nature of these language relationships varied, their importance remained consistent. Furthermore, individual practice emerged as a significant factor for both classes. Enhancing one's English proficiency required personal effort alongside the support of others.

Other educators and programs are encouraged to continue this research in their unique contexts. The brainstorming and ranking task is easily replicable and allows students to reflect on the influences in their lives while providing educators with valuable insights into the social motivators affecting student success. With this knowledge, educators can involve, support, and encourage family and community members as they come alongside their English learners.

References

Bo, W. V. & Fu, M. (2018). How is learning motivation shaped under different contexts: An ethnographic study in the changes of adult learner’s motivational beliefs and behaviors within a foreign language course. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, 1603. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01603

Dörnyei, Z. (2005). The Psychology of the language learner: Individual differences in second language acquisition. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Gardner, R. C. (1985). Social Psychology in Second Language Learning. Edward Arnold Ltd, London, Great Britain.

Hann, N. (2017). Beyond pastoral: The role of family in second language learning experiences of adults. English Scholarship Beyond Borders, 3(1), 29-50. Retrieved February 9, 2021, from https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/145186424.pdf

Hiver, P. & Larsen-Freeman, D. (2020). Motivation: It is a relational system. In A.H. AlHoorie & P.D. MacIntyre (Eds.), Contemporary Language Motivation Theory: 60 years since Gardner and Lambert (pp. 285-303). Bristol, Blue Ridge Summit: Multilingual Matters. https://doi.org/10.21832/9781788925204-018

Kozaki, Y. & Ross, S.J. (2011). Contextual dynamics in foreign language learning motivation. Language Learning: A Journal of Research in Language Studies, 61(4), 1328-1354. https://doi-org.libproxy.lcc.lt/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2011.00638.x

Noels, K.A. (2001). New orientations in language learning motivation: Towards a model of intrinsic, extrinsic, and integrative orientations and motivation. In Z. Dörnyei & R. Schmidt (Eds.) Motivation and second language acquisition (pp. 43-68). Honolulu, HI: University of Hawai’i Second Language Teaching and Curriculum Centre.

Papi, M. & Hiver, P. (2020). Language learning motivation as a complex dynamic system: A global perspective of truth, control, and value. The Modern Language Journal, 104(1), 209-232. https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12624.

Ushioda, E. (2009). A Person-in-context relational view of emergent motivation, self and identity. In Z. Dörnyei & E. Ushioda (Ed.), Motivation, Language Identity and the L2 Self (pp. 215-228). Bristol, Blue Ridge Summit: Multilingual Matters. https://doi.org/10.21832/9781847691293-012

Allison Tinch teaches adult English as a Second Language at Lincoln Land Community College.


Social Motivation: Discovering ELLs’ Motivating Relationships By Allison Tinch Introduction Most teachers recognize that student success is not solely determined by their classroom efforts; it is significantly influenced by students' family and community as well. The present study aims to address gaps in previous research by exploring the role of family and home culture in shaping the motivation of adult English Language Learners (ELLs) in a community-based English as a Second Language (ESL) context. Literature Review Extensive research has been conducted to comprehend motivation as it relates to language learning. Researchers have defined motivation in various ways, with Gardner's (1985) foundational definition evolving into more intricate models. While there is no unanimous agreement on a single motivation model, it is widely acknowledged that motivation is complex and dynamic (Dörnyei, 2005; Kozaki & Ross, 2011; Bo & Fu, 2018; Hiver & Larsen-Freeman, 2020; Papi & Hiver, 2020). Ushioda (2009) emphasizes the importance of a "person-in-context" approach, where motivation stems from real individuals embodied with complex social identities and embedded in cultural contexts. Within the realm of motivation lies intrinsic motivation, with autonomy, competence, and relatedness serving as foundational psychological needs. Of these, relatedness underscores the necessity for secure relationships with others to facilitate exploration of the unfamiliar. Significant individuals in an ELL's life are implicated in the learner’s motivation, either fostering an encouraging learning environment or creating a demotivating atmosphere (Noels, 2001). In a qualitative case study, Hann (2017) explored the role of family in the experiences of adult migrant ELLs attending vocational classes with ESL support in colleges in Yorkshire, UK. Both brainstorming and ranking activities and interviews affirmed the significance of family, with participants frequently citing their family's role in their language success. Participants spontaneously mentioned family more often than the classroom and only one participant did not mention family at all as a factor for language success. Family members, including children, spouses, in-laws, and other extended family, functioned as interlocuters and supporters, predominantly facilitating English interactions outside the classroom. As interlocuters, family members scaffolded language to assist with acquisition. Participants also reported using English in their homes with family members that do not share their L1. Interactions with these family members took the form of either direct development of language skills or motivational input. Family members were capable of influencing learners positively or negatively and played three key roles: pastoral, motivation, and interactional. There are gaps in this understanding, however, as Hann's research focused on a specific group of ELLs, but English learners are highly diverse. To delve deeper into this topic, similar research was conducted to address the research question: What is the relationship between family and the learning motivation of adult ESL learners at a community college in Central Illinois? Methodology and Procedure Two classes participated in a brainstorming and ranking activity. The first class consisted of six students, five females and one male, representing Benin, India, China, Peru, and Russia. In the second class, six students, three females and three males, participated and were from Mexico and Honduras. A curriculum-based activity was employed to generate conversation among students regarding factors contributing to English language improvement. Students were provided with blank index cards and asked, "What helps you improve your English?" They were instructed that responses could include people, items, or activities, with only one example of each type provided to avoid influencing their thinking. Students individually wrote helpful factors on cards, using as many cards as needed. After completing their responses, students were grouped together, where they combined and categorized their responses into clusters of similar items. For instance, responses like "watch YouTube," "watch movies," and "watch TV" were grouped together. Groups then shared their factor groupings with the class. Commonalities between the groups were merged to simplify the list into primary helpful factors: six for Class One and eight for Class Two. Using the master list, students ranked the factors from most important (1) to least important (6/8). Participants shared their rankings with the class and engaged in discussions to identify similarities and differences between their lists. The researcher collected the factor cards and ranking lists for analysis. Each individual response item was categorized by the researcher to ascertain the frequency and type of factors mentioned, and the frequency and rankings were compared. Results Class One produced 40 individual factors, which were synthesized into six categories: class, technology, independent practice, talking in community, jobs, and family. Independent practice was the most frequently mentioned factor, while technology, family, and jobs were mentioned less frequently. Class discussions, as observed by the researcher, revealed differences in students' perceptions of the importance of each factor. In individual rankings, all students placed the highest importance on factors involving people around them. Three students ranked community as either 1 or 2, two students ranked family as either 1 or 2, and four students ranked class as either 1 or 2. For three students, family received the lowest ranking. Those who spoke most about family or the importance of family were those married to Americans (3 of the 6 students). The students married to Americans ranked family overall as 1, 2, or 6. Despite ranking family the lowest, the one student with a native English-speaking partner still frequently cited her spouse in conversation. In contrast, students without Americans or native English speakers in their family ranked family as less important, with community interactions playing a more significant role. Class Two generated 37 individual factors, which were synthesized into eight groupings: watching content in English, writing, reading, listening to music, speaking (work and family), using phone apps, asking questions, and paying attention in class. Speaking had the highest frequency, followed by reading. As with Class One, discussion revealed differences in student perception of each factor’s importance. Consistent with the frequency rankings, speaking in some form ranked high among students, with four students ranking it as either 1 or 2. Reading also ranked as 1 or 2 for three students. Asking questions either fell at the bottom of the list or did not make the list at all. Half of the students in Class Two (3 out of 6) mentioned talking to their children, while others frequently mentioned conversing with colleagues at work. Unlike Class One, most Class Two students worked outside their homes. The inclusion of "asking questions" and "paying attention" factors did not specify whom they directed their inquiries to or paid attention to, but they indicated sources of knowledge students relied on for assistance in learning. Conclusions and Suggestions for Future Research The two participating classes yielded distinct results that reflected the influence of family, community, and workplace environments of each class. Students with English-speaking family members acknowledged their impact on language practice, while those integrated into English-speaking work communities viewed these communities as beneficial for improving their English. Conversely, students without family or work communities found practice among peers or the broader English-speaking community. Consuming and producing language in relationship with others played a pivotal role in language improvement, and while the nature of these language relationships varied, their importance remained consistent. Furthermore, individual practice emerged as a significant factor for both classes. Enhancing one's English proficiency required personal effort alongside the support of others. Other educators and programs are encouraged to continue this research in their unique contexts. The brainstorming and ranking task is easily replicable and allows students to reflect on the influences in their lives while providing educators with valuable insights into the social motivators affecting student success. With this knowledge, educators can involve, support, and encourage family and community members as they come alongside their English learners. References Bo, W. V. & Fu, M. (2018). How is learning motivation shaped under different contexts: An ethnographic study in the changes of adult learner’s motivational beliefs and behaviors within a foreign language course. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, 1603. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01603 Dörnyei, Z. (2005). The Psychology of the language learner: Individual differences in second language acquisition. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Gardner, R. C. (1985). Social Psychology in Second Language Learning. Edward Arnold Ltd, London, Great Britain. Hann, N. (2017). Beyond pastoral: The role of family in second language learning experiences of adults. English Scholarship Beyond Borders, 3(1), 29-50. Retrieved February 9, 2021, from https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/145186424.pdf Hiver, P. & Larsen-Freeman, D. (2020). Motivation: It is a relational system. In A.H. AlHoorie & P.D. MacIntyre (Eds.), Contemporary Language Motivation Theory: 60 years since Gardner and Lambert (pp. 285-303). Bristol, Blue Ridge Summit: Multilingual Matters. https://doi.org/10.21832/9781788925204-018 Kozaki, Y. & Ross, S.J. (2011). Contextual dynamics in foreign language learning motivation. Language Learning: A Journal of Research in Language Studies, 61(4), 1328-1354. https://doi-org.libproxy.lcc.lt/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2011.00638.x Noels, K.A. (2001). New orientations in language learning motivation: Towards a model of intrinsic, extrinsic, and integrative orientations and motivation. In Z. Dörnyei & R. Schmidt (Eds.) Motivation and second language acquisition (pp. 43-68). Honolulu, HI: University of Hawai’i Second Language Teaching and Curriculum Centre. Papi, M. & Hiver, P. (2020). Language learning motivation as a complex dynamic system: A global perspective of truth, control, and value. The Modern Language Journal, 104(1), 209-232. https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12624. Ushioda, E. (2009). A Person-in-context relational view of emergent motivation, self and identity. In Z. Dörnyei & E. Ushioda (Ed.), Motivation, Language Identity and the L2 Self (pp. 215-228). Bristol, Blue Ridge Summit: Multilingual Matters. https://doi.org/10.21832/9781847691293-012 Allison Tinch teaches adult English as a Second Language at Lincoln Land Community College.
Spring 2024 (2) - Spring 2024