Ideal Self, Ought-to Self, Integrative, and Instrumental Motivations Among Non-Iranian Learners of Persian: A Case Study of Chinese and Korean Learners

Authors
S. Khaleghizadeh 1
M. pahlavannezhad 2
A. Vakilifard 3
A. Kamyabi 4
1 PhD Candidate in linguistics, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad, Iran.
2 Associate Professor, Department of Linguistics, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad, Iran
3 Assistant Professor of Persian Language Teaching to non-Persian speakers, Imam Khomeini International University, Qazvin, Iran.
4 Assistant Professor, Department of Persian Language and Literature and Department of Linguistics, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad, Iran.
Abstract
integrative and instrumental motivation as well as Ideal self and Ought-to self on the motivation and success of language learners, the present study has investigated these issues among the learners in Persian language. For this purpose, 20 Korean and Chinese students (10 Chinese and 10 Korean students) were selected from the Persian language teaching center of Ferdowsi University of Mashhad. Thus, the statistical sample of the study consisted of 20 Persian-Chinese students and Korean men and women (8 men and 12 women) who were in the age group of 18 to 30 years and in the academic year 2016-2017.

It is also worth mentioning that these Persian students have reached an advanced stage in this center, from the introductory course of Persian language. The Farsi students responded to a 36-item questionnaire based on the Dornyei Motivational Questionnaire (2010). Finally, the data were analyzed using SPSS software. six hypotheses were proposed and we used statistical tests to examine the hypotheses. First, the normality of the research variables was examined and the results showed that these variables have a normal distribution. Therefore, as mentioned, in the next step, we examined the research hypotheses. The results of the study showed that there is a significant difference between Ought-to selves of Korean learners and Chinese or Japanese tutors. However, there is no meaningful difference between Ought-to selves of Japanese and Chinese learners. There was a significant difference between Korean, Chinese and Japanese Ideal selves. In addition, there was no significant difference between the Chinese, Korean, and Japanese learners’ promotional instrumental motivations. While there was a significant difference between preventive instrumental motivation of Japanese learners and Chinese or Korean ones. And there was no significant difference between Chinese and Korean. The results of the research suggest that there is a significant difference between integrative motivation of the Chinese, Korean and Japanese learners. There was no meaningful relationship between integrative motivation of Chinese, Korean and Japanese students and their Ideal selves. There was a significant negative correlation between ought-to self and preventive instrumental motivating of Korean students, while there was no significant relationship between these two variables in Japanese and Chinese students.

In addition, a comparison of the meanings of all four motivational factors in these two groups of Persian-learners showed that, in general, in these two groups of Persian-learners, the Preventing Instrumental motivation was with the highest average, and the Ought-to self motivation has the lowest average. Also, the comparison between the motivational factors of Ideal self and Ought-to self indicates that in these two groups of Persian-learners, the Ideal self factor is stronger than Ought-to self. Comparison between the motivational factors of integration and instrumentation also showed that the Preventing motivational factor is stronger than the integrative factor and the integrative factor is stronger than the promotional instrumental factor.

Finally, it should be noted that the present study focuses only on Chinese and Korean Persian learners; for this reason, it is suggested that in future studies, Persian learners of other languages be examined. In addition, it is suggested that other motivational factors related to second language learning regarding non-Iranian learners of Persian, be examined separately and compared with each other. In this case, how to teach and use educational resources can be planned according to the type of related motivation.


Keywords

Subjects

• Abdelahzadeh, E. & Papi, M. (2009). “L2 motivational self system, L2 anxiety, and motivated behavior: A structural equation modeling approach ”. Journal of Technology and Education. 3 )3(. Pp: 193-204. [In Persian].
• Csizér, K. & Dörnyei, Z. (2005). “The internal structure of language learning motivation and its relationship with language choice and learning effort”. Modern Language Journal. 89(1).Pp: 19–36.
• Dörnyei, Z. (1994). “Motivation and motivating in the foreign language classroom” Modern Language Journal. 40. Pp: 46-78.
• Dörnyei, Z. & Ottó, I. (1998). “Motivation in action: A process model of L2 motivation”. Working Papers in Applied Linguistics. 4.Pp: 43–69.Dörnyei, Z. (2005), The psychology of the language learner: Individual Differences in second language acquisition. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
• Dörnyei, Z. (2009), The Psychology of Second Language Acquisition. Oxford. Oxford University Press.
• Ellis, R. (2008), The Study of Second Language Acquisition. 2nd Edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Gardner, R. C. & Lambert, W. E. (1959). “Motivational variables in second language acquisition”. Canadian Journal of Psychology. 13.Pp. 266–272.
• Gardner, R. C. (1985). Social Psychology and Second Language Learning. London. Arnold.
• Gardner, R. C. & Macintyre, P. D. (1993), “A student’s contributions to second language learning. Part II: Affective variables”. Language Teaching. 26. Pp: 1–11.
• Gardner, R.; Smythe, P.; Clément, R. & Gliksman, L. (1976). “Second language acquisition: a social psychological perspective”. Canadian Modern Language Review 32.Pp: 198-213.
• Gardner, R. C. & Tremblay, P. F. (1994). “On motivation, research agendas, and theoretical frameworks". The Modern Language Journal. 78. Pp : 359-368.
• Gardner, R. C. (2001). “Integrative Motivation and Second Language Acquisition”. In Z. Dörnyei & R. Schmidt (Eds.), Motivation and second language acquisition, (Technical Report #23, pp. 422-459). Honolulu: University of Hawaii, Second Language Teaching and Curriculum Center.
• Gardner, R. C. (2010). Motivation and Second Language Acquisition: the Socio- Educational Model. New York: Peter Lang.
• Ghaderi, B. (2012). Effect of Motivation on success of Persian language learners. (Master dissertation), Allameh Tabataba'i University, Tehran. [In Persian]
• Higgins, 1998 E.T. (1996), “Knowledge activation: Accessibility, applicability, and salience. In Higgins ET, Kruglanski” AW. (Eds). Social Psychology: Handbook of Basic Principles, (pp. 133-168), Guilford: New York.Keller, J. M. (1983). “Motivational design of instruction”. In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional design theories and models: An overview of their current status. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
• Kormos, J. & Csizer, K. (2008). “Age-related differences in the motivation of learning English as a FL: attitudes, selves, and motivated learning behavior”. Langauage Learning. 58(2). Pp: 327-355.
• Lai, M. L. (2005). “Language attitudes of the first postcolonial generation in Hong Kong secondary schools”. Language in Society. 34. Pp: 363-388.
• Lamb, M. (2004). “Integrative motivation in a globalizing world”. System. 32. Pp: 3-19.
• Macintyre, P. D.; Mackinnon, S. P. & Clément, R. (2009). “The Baby, the Bathwater, and the Future of Language Learning Motivation Research”. In Z. Dörnyei & E. Ushioda (Eds.), Motivation, language identity and the L2 self (pp. 9-42). Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters.
• Markus, H., & Nurius, P. (1986), “Possible selves”. American Psychologist. 41(9).Pp: 954–969.
• Noels, K. A.; Clement, R. & Pelletier, L. G. (2000). “Intrinsic, extrinsic, and integrative orientations of French Canadian learners of English”. Canadian Modern Language Review. 57. Pp. 424-444.
• Oyserman, D., Bybee, D., Terry, K., & Hart–Johnson, T. (2004), Possible selves as roadmaps. Journal of Research in Personality. 38. Pp: 130–149.
• Papi, M. (2010). “The L2 motivational self system, L2 anxiety, and motivated behavior: A structural equation modeling approach”, System. (38). Pp: 467-479.
• Rehman, A., Bilal, H. A., Sheikh, A., Bibi,N., Nawaz, A.(2014). “The role of motivation in learning English language for Pakistani learners”. International Journal of Humanities and Social Science. Vol. 4 No. 1.
• Richards, J. C , Platt, J. & Weber, H. (1985). Longman Dictionary of Applied Linguistics. Harlow, Essex, England: Longman Group Limited.
• Sediqifar, Z. & Khaleghizadeh, Sh. (2016). “Motivational orientations and academic achievement among Arabic speaking learners of Persian”. Journal of Teaching Persian Language to Non-Persian Speakers, 5th year, second issue (12th period). Pp. 75-94. [In Persian].
• Taguchi, T. ; Magid, M. & Papi, M. (2009) . “The L2 motivational self system among Japanese, Chinese and Iranian Learners of English: A Comparative Study”, In Z. Dörnyei & E. Ushioda (Eds.), Motivation, Language Identity and the L2 self . (pp. 66-97). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
• Tort Calvo, Elisabet (2015). Language Learning Motivation: The L2 Motivational Self System and its Relationship with Learning Achievement, unpublished M.A Thesis .Autonoma university of Barcelona.
• Vermunt, J.D.H.M. & Van Rijswijk, F.A.W.M. (1998). “Analysis and development of students' skill in selfregulated learning”. High Educ. 17. Pp. 647–682.
• Yaghoubinezhad, H.; Moinzade, A. & Barati, H. (2018) “An interactive and dynamic perspective of L2 motivation while performing tasks over different timescales”. Language Related Research. 8 (6) .Pp: 137-160. [In Persian].
Language Related Research
Volume 11, Issue 2 - Serial Number 56
May and June 2020
Pages 287-314