SRAZ 52 Mihaljevvic Djigunovic Bagaric

7/29/2019 SRAZ 52 Mihaljevvic Djigunovic Bagaric

1/24

259

J. Mihaljevi Djigunovi & V. Bagari,A Comparative Study of Aitudes...- SRAZ LII, 259-281 (2007)

Jelena Mihaljevi Djigunovi

Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, ZagrebVesna BagariFaculty of Philosophy, Osek

A Comparative Study of Aitudes and Motivation of CroatianLearners of English and German

UDC 37.042:81243=111(=163.42)37.042:81243=112.2(=163.42)

Original scientic paperReceived on 13 October 2007

Accepted for publication on 3 April 2008

InthiscomparativelongitudinaltrendstudytheauthorscompareaitudesandmotivationofCroatianlearnersofEnglishandGerman.ComparisonsaremadenotonlywithrespecttotheFLbutalsototwoagepointsofthelearnerslanguageandaectivedevelopment:endofprimaryeducation(age14)andendofsecondaryeducation(age18).Inthestudyboththequantitativeandqualitativeresearchparadigmswereemployed.Datawasgatheredbymeansofaquestion-naireconsistingofthreeparts,includingbothstructuredandopen-endeditems.Conclusionsaremadeonthebasisofcombinedquantitativeandqualitativeresults.

Implicationsforfurtherresearchareoeredaswell.

Approaches to Motivational Research

L2aitudesandmotivationareperhapsthemostresearchedindividualdierencevariale.Wecantracetheeginningsofsystematicinvestigationofthislearnerfactortothe1960s,whenresultsofseminalstudiesyGardnerandcolleaguesstartedtoepulished.InhisoverviewoftheeldDrnyei(2005)distinguishesthreephasesinmotivationalresearchhistory.Thesocialpsychologicalphase(upto1990),thecognitive-situatedphase(duringthe1990s)andtheprocess-orientedphase(lastsevenyearsorso).Throughoutthedecadesconceptualisationsofmotivationecame

SRAZ 52 book.indb 259 17.4.2008 14:52:34


2/24

260


morecomplexaswellasmorerevealingofthevarialesthatshouldeadoptedinthemotivationalparadigms.

ThemostrecentconceptualisationofL2motivation( the L2 MotivationalSelf System)wasdesignedyDrnyei(2005;Csizr&Drnyei2005),whouildsuphistheoreticalasisfromndingsofresearchintopossileandidealselvescarriedoutinpersonalitypsychology.TheL2 Motivational SelfSystemisdenedythreedimensions:Ideal L2 Self(wishtolearntheL2ecausethepersonwewouldliketoecomespeaksthelanguage),Ought-to L2 Self(wishtopossesscertainariutestoavoidnegativeoutcomes)

andL2 Learning Experience(motivesconnectedwiththeimmediatelearningenvironment).TheidealselfthattheL2learnerwantstoachieveisdenedasagreeale,competent,andsuccessfulL2user(Csizr&Drnyei2005:30).DrnyeiinterpretsGardners(1985;Gardner&Lamert1972)conceptofintegrativenessassomekindofidenticationwithinthelearnersself-concept.L2motivationis,then,denedastheL2learnerswishtoreducethediscrepanciesetweenhisactualandideallanguageselves.

OneofthevarialesthathaseenshowntoplayanimportantroleinaitudesandmotivationinFLlearningislinguisticself-condence(ClmentandGardner2001;Clment,GardnerandSmythe1997;Clment

andKruidenier1985).ItreferstotheL2learnerseliefthatheisaletoperformcompetentlyandtoachievelearningresults.Originally,linguisticself-condencewasenvisionedasasociallydeterminedconceptasedondirectcontactetweenL1andL2speakersinmulti-ethnicseings.However,itwasshowninlaterstudies(e.g.,Clment,DrnyeiandNoels1994)toealsorelevanttoFLcontexts,wheredirectcontactisusuallysustitutedyindirectcontactwiththeL2languageandculture,mostlythroughthemedia.TheimpactofindirectcontactcaneparticularlyprominentincaseofEnglish,whichhasturnedintoagloallanguage.

ResearchonariutionsofsuccessandfailureinFLlearning(e.g.,Ushioda1998;Williamsandburden1999;Williams,burdenandAl-baharna2001)hashighlightedtheimportanceofariutionalprocessesasamotivationalfactor.bothquantitativeandqualitativestudiessuggestthatlanguagelearnersperceptionsoflanguagelearningareinuencedytheirariutions,andresearchersstressthesalientvalueofariutionsthatenhancelanguagelearningmotivation.AccordingtoUshioda(1998),

SRAZ 52 book.indb 260 17.4.2008 14:52:34


3/24

261


ariutingachievementtointernalfactors,suchasailityoreort,andariutingfailuretounstalefactors,suchaslackofeort,reectthedesiralepositive motivational thinking.Williamsetal.(2001)arguethatariutionsare,atleastpartly,relatedtolearnersculturalackground.

The immediate learning environment has een recognized asapowerfulmotivationalfactor,especiallyinFLlearningcontexts,wherethereisnodirectcontactwithL2speakers.MihaljeviDjigunovi(1991;1998)foundthatCroatianEFLlearnersperceptionofteachercompetence,aswellastheirperceptionofvalue,utilityandinterestoftheirEnglish

coursecorrelatedpositivelywiththeeorttheyinvestedinlearningEnglish.Theteachingseing(includingtheteacher,methodologyandmaterials)wasfoundtoeoneoftwodemotivatorsamongtheselearners.Nikolovsstudy (2001)onHungarianunsuccessfullanguage learnersrevealedthat,inspiteofpositiveaitudestotheL2andtolanguagelearning,theywerenotsuccessful:theirfailurewasshowntoerelatedtotheirperceptionofteachingmethodology,especiallytotheprevailingrote-learning,form-focusedactivitiesandinappropriateassessmenttechniques.Inar,Donitsa-SchmidtandShohamy(2001)showedthatqualityofteachingwastheestpredictorofIsraelilearnersintention

tocontinuelearningAraicinspiteofnegativeaitudestothetargetlanguagegroup.TheseauthorsalsofoundthatthestrengthofaitudesandmotivationwasrelatedtoeingactivelyengagedinFLlearning.

Aitudes and Motivation for Learning Dierent Foreign Lan-gaues

NotmuchresearchhaseendoneonmotivationforlearningdierentFLsinthesamesocio-educationalcontexts.InCroatia,aitudesandmotivationofyounglearnersofEnglish,French,GermanandItalianwereinvestigatedinanearlyFLlearninglongitudinalproject.Theresultspointedtohighlypositiveinitialaitudesandtothefactthattheycanremainverypositiveunderfavouraleconditions(MihaljeviDjigunovi1993,1995).Nikolov(1999,2007)studiedaitudesofHungarianprimarylearnersofEnglishandGermanandfoundthatlearnersofothlanguages

SRAZ 52 book.indb 261 17.4.2008 14:52:34


4/24

262


hadpositiveaitudestotheFLtheywerelearning.However,comparedtolearnersofGerman,learnersofEnglishhadmorepositiveaitudes,aimedathigherlearninggoalsandweremoresuccessfulinlearning.AnotherlargescalestudyinHungary(Drnyei,CsizrandNmeth2006)lookedintoaitudesandmotivationoflearnersofEnglish,French, German,ItalianandRussianattheageof13-14.ThendingsofthisstudyshowedthatpositiveaitudeswererelatedtolivingclosetotheorderwheretheFLisspoken(thecaseofGermanandRussian),tothetraditiontheFLhadintheregion(thecaseofFrench)andtothecosmopolitancharacterofthe

area(thecaseofItalianinbudapest).Morestudieslookingintoaitudesandmotivationforlearningdierentlanguagesarewarrantedifwewanttogetaroaderinsightintomotivationalissues.

Aitudes and Motivation for Learning English and German inthe Croatian Context

Aim of the study

ThestudywascarriedoutinordertoseehowlearnersoftwodierentFLsfeelaouttherespectiveFL,languagelearningandthemselvesaslanguagelearners.Morespecically,theaimswere:1)togetaninsightintoaitudesandmotivationforlearningEnglishandGermanofCroatianlearnersattheendofprimaryandattheendofsecondaryeducation,and2)tocompareaitudesandmotivationforlearningthesetwoFLsinthesamesocio-educationalcontext.

Sample

Atotalof220Year8(age14)andYear12(age18)learnersparticipatedinthestudy.The107Year8participantsweredrawnfrom15primaryschools,whilethe113Year12participantscamefromtensecondaryschools(othgrammarandvocational).Participantsweredividedintotheprimaryschoolsamplegroup(I.)andthesecondaryschoolsample

SRAZ 52 book.indb 262 17.4.2008 14:52:34


5/24

263


group(II.),whichwerefurthersudividedintotheprimaryEnglishsu-samplegroup(I.E)(N=54),primaryGermansu-samplegroup(I.G)(N=53), secondaryEnglish (II.E)(N=56)andsecondary German (II.G)(N=57)su-sample groups.The reakdownandcharacteristicsofthesamplearepresentedinTale1.

Table 1. Breakdown of the sample

ENGLISH (E) GERMAN (G)TOTALGender

TotalGender

Totalm f m f

Numberof

participants

PS(I.)

32(59.3)

22(40.7) 54 (50.47) 21(39.6)

32(60.4)

53 (49.53) 107

SS(II.)

17(30.4) 39(69.6) 56 (49.56)

19(33.3)

38(66.7) 57 (50.44) 113

English/German

grade means

PS(I.) 3.72 4.64 4.09 3.9 4.75 4.42 4.25

SS(II.) 3.82 4.33 4.18 3.47 4.1 3.89 4.04

PS=primary school; SS=secondary school

AscaneseeninTale1,participantswereevenlyspreadacrossthesu-su-samples.Thenumerofmaleandfemaleparticipantswasfairlyeventoo.DierencesintheFLgradeetweenthesu-samplesweretestedyt-tests.NosignicantdierenceswerefoundetweenthetwoFLsu-samplesingroupI.(t=1.788,p>.05)noringroupII.(t=-1.447,p>.05).

Instruments

Athree-partquestionnairewasusedtocollectdataonparticipantsaitudesandmotivationforlearningEnglish/German.TheinstrumentwasdevelopedinHungaryandvalidatedinCroatiainanearlierstudy(MihaljeviDjigunovi&bagari2007).Therstpartofthequestionnaireaskedfordemographicdata.Thesecondpartcomprised14statementselicitingparticipantsaitudesandmotivationforlearningEnglish/

SRAZ 52 book.indb 263 17.4.2008 14:52:35


6/24

264


German.Ave-pointLikert-typescaleofagreementaccompaniedeachstatement.Thethirdpartincludedtwoopen-endedquestionsaskingforanelaorateansweronwhatparticipantslikedanddislikedaouttheirEnglish/Germanclasses.

Thequestionnairewasrstpilotedon120primaryandsecondarylearnersofEnglish/German.Reliailitywas.86.

Procedure

Thequestionnairewasadministeredtothreegenerationsofpartici-pantsineasternCroatia(theOsekregion).ParticipantswerellinginthequestionnaireduringtheirregularFLclass.

bothquantitativeandqualitativeanalyseswereperformedonthecollecteddata.Thequantitativeanalysiswascarriedoutusing SPSS forWindows 11.2.

Results

Quantitative analyses

Tale2elowshowsresultsofquantitativeanalysesofdatagatheredinthesecondpartofthequestionnaire.Itincludesdistriutionoffrequencies,aswellasmodesandpercentagesofparticipantswiththeparticularmode.ResultsareparallellyshownforEnglishandGerman.ThedarkershadedenotespotentiallysignicantdierencesetweenparticipantslearningEnglishandthoselearningGermaninagreeingwithastatement,andthelightershadeisusedforpotentiallysignicantdierencesetweenYear8andYear12participants.

SRAZ 52 book.indb 264 17.4.2008 14:52:35


7/24

265


Table 2. Results of descriptive statistics for the second part of thequestionnaire

Variable Sample N Min Max M SD Mo Frequency(%)

ITEM1:IlikeE/Gverymuch.

I.E 52 1.00 5.00 4.077 1.026 5* 21(40.4)G 53 1.00 5.00 3.415 1.100 4 19(35.8)

II.E 56 1.00 5.00 4.036 1.044 4 26(46.4)G 57 1.00 5.00 2.842 1.279 2 19(33.3)

ITEM2:KnowingE/Gisuselesstome.

I.E 52 1.00 4.00 1.346 0.814 1 42(80.8)G 53 1.00 4.00 1.491 0.846 1 36(67.9)

II.E 56 1.00 5.00 1.123 0.574 1 52(92.9)G 57 1.00 5.00 1.877 1.070 1 29(50.9)

ITEM3:MyparentsthinkitimportantthatIspeakE/G.

I. E 52 1.00 5.00 4.365 1.010 5* 33(63.5)G 53 1.00 5.00 4.057 1.120 5* 28(52.8)

II.E 56 1.00 5.00 4.411 0.910 5* 35(62.5)G 57 1.00 5.00 3.772 1.282 5* 22(38.6)

ITEM4:IminterestedinpeoplewhospeakE/G.

I.E 51 1.00 5.00 4.137 1.077 5* 24(47.1)G 53 1.00 5.00 3.113 1.266 4* 20(37.7)

II.E 56 2.00 5.00 4.250 0.792 4;5 24(42.9)G 57 1.00 5.00 3.228 1.488 5* 16(28.1)

ITEM5:IminterestedinlmsandpopmusicinE/G.

I.E 52 1.00 5.00 4.289 1.091 5* 34(65.4)G 53 1.00 5.00 2.189 1.194 1 19(35.8)

II.E 56 1.00 5.00 4.590 0.804 5 40(71.4)G 57 1.00 5.00 2.333 1.286 1;2 18(31.6)

ITEM6:MyE/Gclassesareveryoring.

I.E 52 1.00 5.00 2.327 1.248 1 17(32.7)G 53 1.00 5.00 2.302 1.234 1 18(34.0)

II. E 56 1.00 5.00 2.500 1.096 2 26(46.4)G 56 1.00 5.00 2.536 1.190 3 20(35.7)ITEM7:Ihavenofeelingforthislanguage.ImahopelesscaseforFLs.

I.E 52 1.00 4.00 1.481 0.852 1 36(69.2)G 53 1.00 4.00 1.547 0.774 1 32(60.4)

II.E 56 1.00 4.00 1.464 0.808 1 39(69.6)G 57 1.00 5.00 1.947 1.156 1 27(47.4)

ITEM8:ItiseasyformetolearnE/G..

I.E 52 1.00 5.00 4.231 1.022 5* 26(50.0)G 53 1.00 5.00 3.830 1.014 4 24(45.3)

II.E 56 1.00 5.00 4.000 0.809 4 31(55.4)G 57 1.00 5.00 3.000 1.323 4* 16(28.1)

ITEM9:IdneedmuchmoreeorttoeeeratE/G.

I.E 52 1.00 5.00 3.058 1.474 1;4 12(23.1)G 53 1.00 5.00 3.604 1.261 5* 17(32.1)

II.E 55 1.00 5.00 2.709 1.301 2 17(30.9)G 57 1.00 5.00 3.860 1.109 5* 20(35.1)

ITEM10:NomaerhowmuchItry,Icantachieveeerresults.

I. E 51 1.00 5.00 1.529 1.102 1 40(78.4)G 53 1.00 5.00 1.680 0.956 1 30(56.6)

II.E 55 1.00 5.00 1.436 0.811 1 38(69.1)

G 57 1.00 5.00 1.737 0.992 1 31(54.4)

ITEM11:IuseEnglishinmyfreetime.

I.E 52 1.00 5.00 3.404 1.575 5* 20(38.5)G 53 1.00 5.00 2.340 1.255 1 17(32.1)

II.E 56 1.00 5.00 3.107 1.216 4* 17(30.4)G 57 1.00 5.00 2.035 1.165 1 26(45.6)

SRAZ 52 book.indb 265 17.4.2008 14:52:35


8/24

266


ITEM12:IoenfailwhilelearningE/G.

I.E 52 1.00 4.00 1.731 0.931 1 28(53.8)G 53 1.00 5.00 2.245 1.054 2 18(34.0)

II.E 56 1.00 4.00 1.643 0.819 1 29(51.8)G 57 1.00 5.00 2.228 1.165 1 19(33.3)

ITEM13:ImagraidofspeakingE/Ginclass.

I.E 51 1.00 5.00 1.745 1.091 1 30(58.8)G 53 1.00 5.00 2.094 1.390 1 28(52.8)

II.E 56 1.00 5.00 2.018 1.228 1 27(48.2)G 57 1.00 5.00 2.386 1.320 1 20(35.1)

ITEM14:OurE/Gtextooksaread.

I.E 51 1.00 5.00 2.176 1.228 1 21(41.2)G 53 1.00 5.00 2.208 1.183 1 18(34.0)

II.E 56 1.00 5.00 2.786 1.039 3 24(42.9)G 57 1.00 5.00 3.404 1.208 3 20(35.1)

*Mode is higher than mean

ResultsofdescriptivestatisticalanalysespresentedaovesuggesttheremightedierencesinaitudesandmotivationforlearningEnglishandGermanamongCroatianlearners.Inordertondoutwhichofthedierencesaresignicantweperformedindependentsamplest-tests.ResultsarepresentedinTale3.

SRAZ 52 book.indb 266 17.4.2008 14:52:35


9/24

267


Table 3. Signicance of dierences: results of independent samples t-tests

VariableComparedgroups N M SD t Sig.

ITEM1:IlikeE/Gverymuch.

I.E 52 4.077 1.026 3.187 .002**G 53 3.415 1.100

II.E 56 4.036 1.044 5.440 .000**G 57 2.842 1.279

ITEM2:KnowingE/Gisuselesstome.

I.E 52 1.346 0.814 -.891 .375G 53 1.491 0.846

II.E 56 1.123 0.574 -4.667 .000**G 57 1.877 1.070

ITEM3:

MyparentsthinkitimportantthatIspeakE/G.

I.E 52 4.365 1.010 1.425 .157G 53 4.057 1.120

II.E 56 4.411 0.910 3.058 .003**G 57 3.772 1.282

ITEM4:IminterestedinpeoplewhospeakE/G.

I.E 51 4.137 1.077 4.448 .000**G 53 3.113 1.266

II.E 56 4.250 0.792 4.567 .000**G 57 3.228 1.488


I.E 52 4.289 1.091 9.404 .000**G 53 2.189 1.194

II.E 56 4.590 0.804 11.200 .000**G 57 2.333 1.286

ITEM6:MyE/Gclassesareveryoring.

I.E 52 2.327 1.248 .103 .918G 53 2.302 1.234

II.E 56 2.500 1.096 -.165 .869G 56 2.536 1.190

ITEM7:Ihavenofeelingforthislanguage.ImahopelesscaseforFLs.

I.E 52 1.481 0.852 -.418 .677G 53 1.547 0.774

II.E 56 1.464 0.808

-2.578 .011*G 57 1.947 1.156

ITEM8:ItiseasyformetolearnE/G..

I.E 52 4.231 1.022 2.016 .046*G 53 3.830 1.014

II.E 56 4.000 0.809 4.857 .000**G 57 3.000 1.323


I.E 52 3.058 1.474 -2.041 .044*G 53 3.604 1.261

II.E 55 2.709 1.301 -5.044 .000**G 57 3.860 1.109

ITEM10:

NomaerhowmuchItry,Icantachieveeerresults.

I.E 51 1.529 1.102 -.741 .460G 53 1.680 0.956

II.E 55 1.436 0.811

-1.752 .083G 57 1.737 0.992

ITEM11:IuseEnglishinmyfreetime.

I.E 52 3.404 1.575 3.825 .000**G 53 2.340 1.255

II.E 56 3.107 1.216 4.756 .000**G 57 2.035 1.165

SRAZ 52 book.indb 267 17.4.2008 14:52:35


10/24

268


ITEM12:IoenfailwhilelearningE/G.

I.E 52 1.731 0.931 -2.648 .009**G 53 2.245 1.054

II.E 56 1.643 0.819 -3.094 .003**G 57 2.228 1.165

ITEM13:ImagraidofspeakingE/Ginclass.

I.E 51 1.745 1.091 -1.427 .157G 53 2.094 1.390

II.E 56 2.018 1.228 -1.534 .128G 57 2.386 1.320

ITEM14:OurE/Gtextooksaread.

I.E 51 2.176 1.228 -.131 .896G 53 2.208 1.183

II.E 56 2.786 1.039 -2.912 .004**G 57 3.404 1.208

TOTAL I.E 54 54.685 13.718 2.227 .028*G 53 49.774 8.425

II. E 56 56.571 7.027 7.093 .000**G 57 45.175 9.844

*p


11/24

269


Table 4. Signicance of dierences by age: results of t-tests

Variable

Compared groups

I.E : II. E I.G : II.G

t Sig. t Sig.

ITEM1:IlikeE/Gverymuch. .207 .837 2.511 .014*

ITEM2:KnowingE/Gisuselesstome. 1.621 .109 -2.109 .037*

ITEM3:MyparentsthinkitimportantthatIspeak

E/G.

-.245 .807 1.200 .233

ITEM4:IminterestedinpeoplewhospeakE/G. -.620 .536 -.434 .665


-1.621 .108 -.610 .543

ITEM6:MyE/Gclassesareveryoring. -.767 .445 -1.007 .316

ITEM7:Ihavenofeelingforthislanguage.ImahopelesscaseforFLs.

.103 .918 -2.147 .034*

ITEM8:

ItiseasyformetolearnE/G.

1.295 .198 3.709 .000**


1.299 .197 -1.132 .260

ITEM10:NomaerhowmuchItry,Icantachieveeerresults.

.498 .620 -.310 .757

ITEM11:IuseEnglishinmyfreetime. 1.090 .279 1.312 .192

ITEM12:IoenfailwhilelearningE/G. .522 .603 .081 .936

ITEM13:ImagraidofspeakingE/Ginclass. -1.209 .229 -1.129 .262

ITEM14:OurE/Gtextooksaread. -2.778 .006** -5.241 .000**

TOTAL -.903 .369 2.623 .010**

*p


12/24

270


Qualitative analyses

InthethirdpartofthequestionnaireparticipantselaoratedonthepositiveandnegativeaspectsoftheteachingofEnglish/Germantheywereexposedto.Theywerefocusedonthefollowingfactorsoftheteachingprocess:teacher,language,teachingcontent,teachingmethodologyandteachingmaterials.They,spontaneously,alsocontemplatedontheFLingeneralandpossiilitiesofusingitinreallife.Thoseanswersthatdidnottintoanyofthelistedcategorieswereputintotwoextraones.

InthefollowingparagraphswefocusonsimilaritiesanddierencesinparticipantsperceptionsofthedierentaspectsoftheirimmediateFLteachingenvironmentasedontheirreportsinthethirdpartofthequestionnaire.

Teacher

bothEnglishandGermanprimaryschoolparticipantsweregenerallysatisedwiththeirFLteacher.Theyparticularlyvaluedteacherswithgoodpersonalcharacteristics(approachale,good-hearted,hardworking,

havingasenseofhumour,showingagenuineinterestinlearners,etc.)andwithgoodeducationalskills(estalishingarapportwithlearners,motivatinglearners,payingaentiontoalllearners,etc.).Intermsoftheteachersdidacticcompetencesprimaryparticipantsstressedparticularlytheimportanceofclearexplanations.Secondaryschoolparticipantsemphasizedtheteacherslanguageanddidacticcompetences,suchaseingaletopresentthelanguagematerialwellandusinginnovativeapproaches in language teaching. Some, assumingly less successfulparticipants,wishedtheirteacherswoulddevotemoreaentiontothem,aswellastotalktothemmoreandhelpthemmore.

Teaching content

Irrespectiveofthelanguagetheywerelearningoroflengthofstudy,participantsconsideredasgoodthosetopicsthatcouldstimulatetheirinterest.Someespeciallypointedouttheimportanceofdealingwith

SRAZ 52 book.indb 270 17.4.2008 14:52:36


13/24

271


contentrelatedtocultureandcivilizationofthecountrieswhoselanguagetheywerelearning.

Grammaticalcontentwasdescriedymanyasunappealing.LearnersofGermanthoughtthattoomuchgrammarwasincludedintheircurriculumandfoundarticlesanddeclinationsespeciallytroulesome.Learnersof Englishcomplainedaout tenses.Generally, participantsperceivedgrammaticalcontentasastract,complicated,dicultandoringutthoughtthatgrammarteachingcouldemademoreinterestingandunderstandale.IncomparisonwithlearnersofEnglish,learnersof

Germanfoundthechoiceoftextooktextsandvocaularylesssatisfactory.ThisalsoappliestotheselectionofvocaularytoelearnedinGerman.Texts were perceivedasremoved fromlearners interests. SecondaryschoollearnersofGermanthoughtalsothattheirtextsweretoolong,fullofunimportantinformationanduselessvocaulary.SomeprimarylearnersofGerman,however,stressedtheneedforalargervocaulary.SomelearnersofGermancommentedthatacquisitionofothgrammarandvocaularywouldemucheasieriftheywereexposedtoandhadtheopportunitytouseGermanout-of-school.Asregardstheamountofcontent,learnersofGermanfeltthattoomuchcontentwascoveredtoo

quickly,whilesome(mostlysuccessful)learnersofEnglishwishedformorenewcontentanddislikedfocusingonfamiliarthingsanddwellingtoolongonunimportantdetails.

Teaching

Participantsofothlanguagesandfromothagegroupscommentedthatteachingshouldnotrelyonlyonthetextookandtheproceduressuggestedinteachersguideooks.Theyvaluedcreativeapproachestoteachingthatimplymotivatingteachingstrategiesdierentfromtraditionalones.Apartfromalternativewaysofteaching,learnersofGermanalsoinsistedonsuchteachingmethodsthatwouldmakedicultlanguagematerialsimplerandmoremanagealetolearn.LikelearnersofEnglish,theydislikedapurelycognitiveapproach,i.e.learningonlyfactsandrules,andfavouredamorecommunicativeapproachasedonnaturallanguageuse.Suchapproach,theyclaimed,startsfromexamples

SRAZ 52 book.indb 271 17.4.2008 14:52:36


14/24

272


ofauthenticlanguageuseandoersopportunitiesforpurposefulandnaturalcommunicationintheFL.Expressionofpersonalmeanings,eitherwhenansweringquestionsorthroughdiscussion,featuredhighontheirlistofdesiraleclassroomactivities.

Participantsfromallsu-samplesequallylikedgroupworkutstressedthattheydidnotlikeworkingintoolargegroups.Songs,games,role-playsandprojectworkwerefavouritesamongallparticipants.Learner-centredactivitieswereparticularlyemphasizedasdesiraleylearnersofGerman.

Allparticipantsstressedtheimportanceoflisteningandreadingactivities,utprimaryschoollearnersinsistedthatpronunciationandvocaularyexerciseswerehighlyimportanttoo.

Oraltestsweregenerallyunpopular,justlikewritinggrammar-focus-edtestsanddictations,orfrequentquick,shortassessments.Interestingly,someparticipants,proalythosewithhighwritingaptitude,likedschoolworks major wrien tests usuallyrequiringeitherwritingcompositionsoransweringquestions.Some,ontheotherhand,preferredoralinterviewsaslongastheywerenotfocusedongrammar.

Vocationalschoollearnersdislikedfrequentreading,translationof

textsanddealingwithgrammar.Theirreportssuggestthatthegrammar-translationmethodisstillcommoninFLclassesinthistypeofschools.

Participantsfromallgroups reported likinglisteningto textsandwatchinglmswithoutsutitlesprovided.

Teaching materials

MostlearnersofEnglish,especiallythoseinYear8,hadnocomplaintsaouttheirtextooks;someevenstressedthattheylikedthemverymuch.Onlysomedislikedparticulartextsutevensuchparticipantsconsideredthetextookasawholegoodandinteresting.LearnersofGerman,however,thoughtthattextooktopicswereoutdated,thattaskswereunimaginativeandnotusefulenough.Oneoftheinterestingoservationstheyalsomaderelatedtolearnerautonomy:theycomplainedthatsometextooksdidnotcontainenoughexplanatoryinputongrammarandvocaularyforindependentlearning.Theyclaimedthat,duetothis,the

SRAZ 52 book.indb 272 17.4.2008 14:52:36


15/24

273


teacherhad touseuptoo muchclasstimeon elaorate explanations.SomesecondarylearnersofGermanwentsofarastoclaimthattextookswere,infact,totallyuseless.Vocationalschoollearnerswereparticularlycriticaloftheirtextooks:theyfoundtextstoolongtomanageandtooinadequatetohelpdevelopcommunicativecompetence.Allparticipantsappreciatedadditionalteachingmaterials,utthiswasespeciallysalientinreportsylearnersofGerman.

Language

LearnersofGermanweredividedintheiropinionsaoutlikingthisFL.Somelikedit,othersdidnotknowwhethertheydid,orconsidereditahardlanguagethatisnoteasilypickedup.ParticipantslearningEnglishlikedthelanguage.IncontrasttotheirGerman-learningcounterparts,theirpositivefeelingstowardstheirFLdidnotdecreasewithlengthofstudy.

Language knowledge and language use

Itisinterestingtonotethatallparticipants,regardlessofthelanguagetheywerelearning,consideredknowingtheFLveryuseful.LearnersofGermanstressedtheimportanceofknowledgeofGermanintheeldofeconomics,whilelearnersofEnglishelievedthatEnglishcouldeusefulinallareasoflifeandwork.SomeprimaryschoollearnersofGermanpointedoutthattheknowledgetheyacquiredinschoolwasnotgoodenoughtouseitforcommunication;somereportedeingdiscouragedylowschoolgradesinGerman.

General comments

LearnersofEnglish,generallyspeaking,likedeverythingconnectedwiththeEnglishlanguageandwithEnglishclasses.PrimaryschoollearnersofGermanwerealso,generally,satised.SecondaryschoollearnersofGerman,however,veryrarelyreportedlikingeverything.Still,anequallysmallnumerofsuchlearnerssaidthattheylikednothing.

SRAZ 52 book.indb 273 17.4.2008 14:52:36


16/24

274


Other

SomeparticipantsconsideredthenumerofhoursoftheFLtoolow,otherstoohigh.Sincethelaercamefromspecicschools,apossileconclusionisthattheiropinionwasconnectedtothequalityofteachingtheywereexposedto.

Discussion

OurquantitativeandqualitativedataanalysesshowthatlearnersofEnglishandlearnersofGermaninoursamplesdieredintheiraitudesandmotivation.Theyalsoindicatethattheiraitudesandmotivationchangedover time. However, signicantchangesoccurred mostly incaseoflearnersofGerman:unfortunately,thesechangesshowedanegativetrend,i.e.motivation forlearning Germandecreased fromYear8toYear12,reectingaloweringof linguisticself-condence.Ofparticularrelevancetoaitudesandmotivationare,inouropinion,thelesspositivelinguisticself-condenceandthelessdesiraleariutionalpaern(evidencedinItems7and8)foundinYear12learnersofGerman

incomparisonnotonlytolearnersofEnglishutalsotoYear8learnersofGerman,

ThesendingsraisetheissueofwhylearnershaddierentmotivationforlearningthetwoFLs.Wewouldliketosuggestthattheexplanationslieinrelativelydierentimmediatelearningenvironmentsaswellasout-of-schoollanguagelearningcontexts.Wewillrstdiscussthepotentialimpactofout-of-schoollanguagelearningcontextsonlearneraitudesandmotivation.

IntheCroatianeducationalcontextothEnglishandGermanareformallytreatedasFLs.However,ifwetakeintoconsiderationeverydayexposuretotheselanguages,wecanseethattheydieressentiallyintheirstatus(Cindri&NaraniKova2005;NaraniKova&Cindri2007)andconditionsoflearning.AsCohen(1994)warns,theso-calledFLcontextincludessomanydierentapproachestothetargetlanguagethatitcansometimesoperateasasecondlanguagecontexttoo.InCroatiathisseemstoetrueaoutEnglish.Ithaslatelyeenconsideredalanguage

SRAZ 52 book.indb 274 17.4.2008 14:52:36


17/24


18/24

276


atothlevelsfoundlearningEnglishpurposefulecause,theyreported,theycoulduseitineverydaylife.WhilelearnersofGermanwerealsoawareofusefulnessofGerman,athigherlevelsthegeneralpragmatic-communicativeorientationschangedtowork-relatedorientations.SincemotivationforlearningGermandecreasedwithyearsofstudy(seeTale4),itcouldeconcludedthatiteitherwanedorotainedacompletelyinstrumentalandextrinsiccharacter.ExtrinsicmotivationincaseoflearnersofGermancanalsoeseenfromthereportsonthehighvaluetheirparentsariutedtolearningthislanguage.

TheteachingprocesscanalsoeconsideredasacontriutortothedierencesinaitudesandmotivationforlearningEnglishandGerman.Sincewedidnotanalyzetheteachingcontextutconcludeaoutitontheasisofparticipantsreports inthequestionnaire,weneedtoforewarnaouttheexplicativestrengthofourconclusions.Still,letusmentionsomeindicativetrendsrelatedtotheteachingoftheselanguages.Itcaneeasilyconcludedfromreportsylearnersofothlanguagesthattheteachingprocessdidnotmotivatethemenoughtousethelanguage.Theyappreciatedoralcommunication,othwiththeteacherandclassmates,utwishedforfarmoreopportunitiesforexpressingtheiropinions,for

discussionsetc.intheFL.Thisshowsthatnotonlytheoreticiansutalsolearners themselves areaware of the importanceof language output.Languageoutputenalescontextualizedandpurposefullanguageuse.Apartfromthat,andmoreimportantly,itenaleslearnerstotesttheirhypothesesaoutthetargetlanguage(Swain1995).Languageoutputstimulatesnoticingwhichleadstounderstanding(Schmidt,1994).Itcan

eseenthatlanguageoutputisimportanttolearnersofothlanguages,utitisevenmoreimportanttolearnersofGermanastheyhavefeweropportunitiestouseitout-of-class.Fortheselearnerslanguageinputis

crucialtoo,utitneedstoecomprehensile,aspointedoutyKrashen(1981)andKrashenandTerrell(1983).ComplaintsylearnersofGermanaouthavingtolearnwordstheysawnousefor,ofdealingwithtoolongandtoodiculttextsindicatethatthelanguageinputtheywereexposedtogotincreasinglylesscomprehensile.Incomprehensileinputcanhaveadetrimentaleectonlanguagelearninganduse.SincethestatusofGermanaswellasitslearningcontextdonotoostlearnermotivation,

SRAZ 52 book.indb 276 17.4.2008 14:52:36


19/24

277


itisnotsurprisingthatcreativeandstimulatingapproachestoteachingwerehighpriorityonthewishlistoflearnersofthislanguage.

AnotherlineofinterpretingdierencesinmotivationforlearningEnglishandGermancanefoundinwhatDrnyeiandCsizr(2002)callatwo-tierapproachtoL2motivation.Thisapproachdistinguishesetweenmotivationforworld-language-learningandmotivationfornon-world-language-learning.Newdevelopmentsinmotivationalreseach,suchasthosereferringtoL2 Motivational Self System(Drnyei2005),mayemoreexplanatoryofmotivationforlearningagloal,worldlanguagelikeEnglishthanofmotivationforlearningalanguagelikeGerman.Thislineofthoughtisstillinitsinfancyasmoreresearchisneededtondoutifittakesusintherightdirection.

Conclusion

ResultsofthisstudysuggestthatlearnersofEnglish,comparedtolearnersofGerman,havemorepositiveaitudes,especiallyathigherlevelsoflearning.Consequently,theirmotivationishighertoo.Motivationfor learningGerman asa FL decreases withyears ofstudy.The main

reasonsforthis,inouropinion,arerelatedtotheimmediatelearningenvironment,thedierentstatusofthetwolanguagesandtoout-of-classexposuretothelanguages.

WeelievethatfutureresearchshouldconcentrateontheimpactofthelearningcontextonaitudesandmotivationoflearnersofEnglishandGerman.Itwouldproalyeveryrevealingifspecialaentionwerepaidtouctuationsinmotivationandtopossilecausesofmotivationalchanges.Thiscallsforlongitudinalresearchwithlargesamples.bothquantitativeandqualitativeresearchparadigmswouldewarrantedasaitudesandmotivationareahighlycomplexindividuallearner

variale.

SRAZ 52 book.indb 277 17.4.2008 14:52:36


20/24

278


REFERENCES:

Arne, Jerey.Jensen.2002.Thepsychologyofgloalization,AmericanPsychologist,57(10),pp.774-783.

bagari,Vesna.2001.Jezinasvjesnostiuenjeengleskoginjemakogkaostranihjezika.Strani jezici 30,3,pp.107-121.

bagari,Vesna2003.FrhesDeutschlernenwarumja? Germanistik imKontaktraum Europa II. Sammelband 1. Linguistik[ed.yK.TeranKo-pecky&T.Petri],Marior:Pedagokafakulteta,pp.257-274.

Cindri,Ivana.&NaraniKova,Smiljana.2005.EnglishandotherforeignlanguagesinCroatia-aneedsanalysis, Strani jezici,3-4,pp.189-203.

Clment,Richard.,Drnyei,Zoltan.andNoels,Kimerly.1994.Moti-vation,self-condenceandgroupcohesionintheforeignlanguageclassroom.Language Learning,44,pp.417-448.

Clment,Richard.andGardner,Roert.2001.Secondlanguagemastery,The new handbook of language and social psychology[ed.yH.Giles&W.PaulRoinson],London:Wiley,pp.489-504.

Clment,Richard.,Gardner,Robert.andSmythe,P.C.1977.Motivational

variablesinsecondlanguageacquisition:Astudyoffrancophoneslearn-ingEnglish,Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science,9,pp.123-133.

Clment, Richard. andKruidenier,b.G.1985.Aptitude,aitudeandmotivationinsecondlanguageprociency:AtestofClmentsmodel,Journal of Language and Social Psychology,4,pp.21-37.

Cohen,AndrewD.1994.Assessing Language Ability in the Classroom,boston,Massachuses:HeinleandHeinlePulishers.

Csizr,Kata.&Drnyei,Zoltan.2005.Theinternalstructureoflanguagelearningmotivationanditsrelationshipwithlanguagechoiceandlearningeort.The Modern Language Journal,89,pp.19-36.

Drnyei,Zoltan.2005.The psychology of the language learner. Individual dif-ferences in second language acquisition.Mahwah,N.J.:LawrenceErlaumAssociates,Inc.,Pulishers.

Drnyei,Zoltan.&Csizr,Kata.2002.Somedynamicsoflanguageat-titudesandmotivation:Resultsofalongitudinalnationwidesurvey.

Applied Linguistics,23(4),pp.421-462.

SRAZ 52 book.indb 278 17.4.2008 14:52:36


21/24

279


Drnyei,Zoltan.&Csizr,Kata.&Nmeth,Nra.2006.Motivation, lan-guage aitudes, and globalisation: a Hungarian perspective.Clevedon:MultilingualMaers

Gardner,Roert.C.1985.Social Psychology and Second Language Learning- The Role of Aitudes and Motivation.London:EdwardArnold.

Gardner,Roert.C.&Lamert,Wallace.E.1972.Aitudes and Motivationin Second-Language Learning.Rowley:NewuryHouse.

Krashen,StephenD.1981.Second Language Acquisition and Second LangugeLearning.Exeter:A.Wheaton&Co.Ltd.

Krashen,StephenD.andTerrell,Tracy.1983.The Natural Approach: Lan-guage Acquisition in the Classroom.Trowridge,Wiltshire:PergamonPressandAlemanyPress,RedwoodburnLtd.

Mihaljevi,Jelena.1990.ResearchonMotivationforLearningEnglishAsaForeignLanguage-AProjectinProgress,SRAZXXXV,pp.151-160.

Mihaljevi,Jelena.1991.Nastavaengleskogjezikaimotivacazauenje[Englishlanguageteachingandmotivationforlearning].Unpulisheddoctoralthesis.Zagre:UniversityofZagre.

MihaljeviDjigunovi,Jelena.(1998).Uloga afektivnih faktora u uenju stra-noga jezika [RoleofaectivefactorsinFLlearning].Zagre:Filozofski

fakultetSveuilitauZagreu.MihaljeviDjigunovi,Jelena.&bagari,Vesna.2007.Engleskijeziku

Hrvatskoj-odpotreadopostignua[EnglishinCroatiafromneedstoachievements]. Metodika,14,pp.51-83.

MihaljeviDjigunovi,Jelena&Geld,Renata2002/2003.EnglishinCroatiaToday:OpportunitiesforIncidentalVocaularyAcquisition, SRAZXLVII-XLVIII,pp.335-352.

Nakata,Y.1995.NewgoalsforJapaneselearnersofEnglish,The LanguageTeacher,19(5),pp.17-20.

Nikolov,Marianne.2001.Astudyofunsuccessfullanguagelearners,Moti-vation and second language acquisition[ed.yZoltanDrnyei&RichardSchmidt],Honolulu:UniversityofHawaii,pp.149-169.

Schmidt,Richard.1994.DeconstructingConsciousnessIsSearchofUsefulDenitionsforAppliedLinguistics.AILA Rewiew,11,11-27.

Swain,Merrill.1995.Threefunctionsofoutputinsecondlanguagelearn-ing, Principle and Practice in Applied Linguistics. Studies in honour of H. G.

SRAZ 52 book.indb 279 17.4.2008 14:52:36


22/24

280


Widdowson [ed.yGuyCook&bararaSeidelhofer],Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress,125-144.

Ushioda,Ema.1998.Eectivemotivationalthinking:Acognitivetheoreti-calapproachtothestudyoflanguagelearningmotivation[ed.yE.A.Soler&V.C.Espurz], Current issues in English language methodology,CastelldelaPlana,Spain:UniversitatJaume,pp.77-89.

Williams,Marion.&burden,R.1999.Studentsdevelopingconceptionsofthemselvesaslanguagelearners,Modern Language Journal,83,193-201.

Williams,Marion.burden,Roert.&Al-baharna,S.2001.Makingsenseofsuccessandfailure:Theroleoftheindividualinmotivationtheory,Motivation and second language acquisition [ed.yZoltanDrnyei&Ri-chardSchmidt],Honolulu:UniversityofHawaiiPress,pp.173-186.

Yashima,Tomoko.2000.Orientationsandmotivationsinforeignlanguagelearning:AstudyofJapanesecollegestudents,JACET Bulletin, 31,121-133.

KOMPARATIVNOISTRAIVANJESTAVOVAIMOTIVACEHRVAT-SKIHUENIKAENGLESKOGAINJEMAKOGJEZIKA

Usvojojlongitudinalnojkomparativnojstudiautoriceusporeujustavoveimotivacuhrvatskihuenikaengleskogainjemakogjezika.Usporedeprovodesoziromnajezikaliistupanjjezinogaiafektivnograzvojauenikaukljuujuiuenikeosmogarazredaosnovnekoleizavrnogarazredasrednjekole.Uistraivanjuse slue i kvantitativnimikvalitativnimpristupom.Podatke suprikupileupitnikomkojegjedioiostrukturiranadionestrukturiran.Zakljukeformirajunatemeljukvantitativnihikvalitativnihrezultata,adonoseiimplikace

svojihnalazazauduaistraivanja.

SRAZ 52 book.indb 280 17.4.2008 14:52:36


23/24

281


Key words:aitudes,motivation,Englishasaforeignlanguage,Ger-manasaforeignlanguage,linguisticself-condence

Kljune rei:stavovi,motivaca,engleskikaostranijezik,njemakikaostranijezik,jezinosamopouzdanje

JelenaMihaljeviDjigunoviDepartmentofEnglishFacultyofHumanitiesandSocialSciences,UniversityofZagreIvanaLuia310000Zagre,[email protected]

Vesnabagari,DepartmentofGermanFacultyofPhilosophy,UniversityofOsekJgerova931000Osek,[email protected]

SRAZ 52 book.indb 281 17.4.2008 14:52:36


24/24

Documents

SRAZ 52 Mihaljevvic Djigunovic Bagaric