GLOBAL LANGUAGE REVIEW (GLR)

People commonly use English to communicate with people of other countries having their own local languages. In the global competition of languages, English holds a significant place as it is one of the widely used languages for communication at international level and serves an important role in higher learning and education (Govt. of Pakistan, 2006). Khalid (2016) claimed that more than one billion people can communicate in English through the world. In most of the countries, learning of English is compulsory for students to meet the requirements of their educational institutions (Ali et al., 2019). There is a demand of proficiency of English language all over the world. Pakistan has the same scenario where it is used as a co official language and medium of instruction at educational institutions and so on. In Pakistan, English is taught in almost all the institutions from grade 1 to university education, and as a medium of instruction in almost all higher education institutions. The people not only use in their young age but also use in their daily lives (Rahman, 1998). Learners are expected to master content of different fields of knowledge by knowing the medium of instruction. English language teaching and learning make the students to fulfill academic requirements in their areas of interset and specialized settings (Adams & Keene, 2000).

The interaction of other people requires language. In the success of the learner, psychological factors play a vital role in acquiring and employing a language. The past researches related to second language acquisition have mostly concentrated on learner-centered techniques, in order to make learners independent and autonomous (Tamada, 1996; Al-Qahtani, 2013;  Al-Khairy, 2013). So the research for learning of language shifted from the product to the process how learning takes place (Oxford, 1990).

The affective domain of Bloom Taxonomy is the way through which learners understand and feel the environment respond accordingly to them. A learner gets biased by his emotional make up regarding any language which affects his learning process in negative or positive way. Negative affective factors are called 'affective filters'. For example the feeling of likeness for a language in a learner can enhance his language learning. Some of the vital affective factors which influence the process of language learning are as follows: Motivation can be referred to such an impulse or desire that helps an individual to act in a certain way. Motivation can be influenced by some individual, instructional or sociocultural factors. Although the identification and study of motivation is quite complex, however its significance in the process of learning cannot be denied (Mat & Yunus, 2014; AL Harthy, 2017).

The motivation is called instrumental when someone wants to learn a language for a particular need, for instance, to get an employment and integrative motivation when wants to become a participant of the society having second language) (Gardner & Lambert, 1972).

The study has been comprised of two objectives one was to identify students’ level of orientations of motivation for second language learning and other was to compare  students’ orientations of motivation for english language learning at higher education level.

Language is the most important instrument of communication which takes place in a social context. So the meaningful communication is to understand and recognze the relation between the language and how people use it. The decision which we make and the decisions, which are made by other people about us, are derived from the language we use. We often judge a person’s education, social and economic standing, background, honesty, friendliness and other qualities by considering the speech of the person and when we express our impression about someone choose language just as to choose dress or hairstyles (Amberg &Vause, 2009).

The most important fact for childern to successfully acquire the first language (L1) is that language is a tool to know the world and the process of language acquisition is a process of socialisation. The child in the beginning learn the language, the word he hears or utters has a close connection with the object it indicates. It is this close connection betweenth a language and material worldth at makes language acquisition successful for a normal child hence the language is both process of cognitive development and process of socialization withdraw which the child is learning the language to identify with his parents and family at the beginning school and later with the people in society (Whiteside et al., 2017).

Learning Foreign language (FL) is being used in different aspects of aquiring education in through out the world  (Macaro, 2003; Macaro et al., 2015; Murphy, 2014; Murphy & Evangelou, 2015; Wivers, 2018). There is no cognitive nor socializing urgency invloved. The learner has completed or will if very young; complete his knowing-world process with the help of his mother tongue and so is the process of socialization. There is no crisis or pressure of social identification. It is ,on the contrary, the foreign language that is regarded as alien. Speaking a foreign language thus is often considered as showing off, strange, or crazy. Therefore, it is difficult to encourage students, especially adult students, to speak foreign language in everyday situation. In addition, speaking a foreign language in everyday condition is not only unnatural but also inconvenient. The speech, which is usually much slower and more ambiguous, often discourages the speaker, let alone the lack of response on the listeners part because of failure of understanding or lack of interest.

The researchers conducted many studies for motivation in the field of psychology and education (Dörnyei, 2001a). Motivation of a learner is an important variables that can impact language learning. It has been presented in research articles as predictor in learning of a foreign language as motivation is a process rather than a product. Motivation is basic condition for achievement associated with success.

Motivation is indeed the foundation on which learning and skill development must be built. This interest may reflect the common perception about the classroom teachers that when they are more aware of motivation of students, the more improvemet in student’s educational achievements is seen in general (Dörnyei, 2001b). The socio-educational model of language learning presented by Gardner (1985) is considered as one of the most popular models in the research studies related to language learning (Robinson, 1995; Cochran, McCallum, & Bell, 2010). This model is based on attitude of students towards the learning, their motivation (integrative orientation and instrumental orientation).

Gardner (1985) describes that motivation is among the most important sources influencing learning of language. The motivation of the students to learn is comprised of four aspects: a goal, effort, want, and attitudes toward the learning activity. Moreover, the motivation of the learner can be classified into two categories including, orientation as instrumental and other as integrative. Reece and Walker (1997) expressed that a weak yet, a motivated student can be more successful than an intelligent student. The teacher should maintain the motivation of the students to learn language.

Language is used to communicate with the people around us relating to our feelings, desires, questions/understand the word about us. We use proper words gestures and tone of voice in a diversity of situations (Sinha, 2012). Lepper et al. (2005) discovered that there is much correlation between the intrinsic motivation and academic achievemnet of a language learner whereas extrinsic motivation indicated negative correlation with academic achievement. Yuet (2008) has conducted his research on the relationship of one factor, motivation, on the achievement in foreign language learning. His study has the setting of a sixth form college in Hong Kong.

The study is descriptive cum survey in nature. The quantitative techniques were used to collect and analyze data. The quantitative methods strengthen the research and allows the research questions to be viewed through the quantitative lenses.

Out of total six public sector general universities three universities (50% of total) having twenty four (24) Bachelor-4 years programs in Hazara University (HU), sixteen (16) Bachelor-4 years programs in Abdul Wali Khan University (AWKUM) and eleven (11) Bachelor -4 years programs in University of Science and Technology, Bannu (USTB) included in the study. The sample of the study was randomly selected from tweleve undergrduate programs of HU Mansehra and eight of (AWKUM) and five from USTB. The sample was comprised of 500 students, twenty (20) students, from each program of the abve three universities of the sample.

The researcher developed a questionnaire comprised of 16 items having students’ integrative orientations of motivation (4 items), instrumental orientations of motivation (6 items), resultative orientations of motivation (3 items), and intrinsic orientations of motivation (3 items). Questionnaires were distributed through personal visits among students. They have  to respond on five point likert scale after briefing that it is not test but it is your perceptions about psychological factors those affect Second Language Learning.

The collected data were tabulated and analyzed to find the frequency of responses for each statement of the questionnaire. The mean scores, standard deviation for each orientation motivation. To determine the motivational level of students, Kitjaroonchai and Kitjaroonchai (2012) used the interpreting technique developed by Best (1981) and Degang (2010). The range of mean score for strongly agree was 4.50-5.00. for agree was 3.50-4.50 for moderate was 2.50-3.50 for disagree was 1.50-2.50 for strongly disagree was1.50-0.50. 

Data Analysis and Interpretation

Table 1. Students’ Integrative Orientations of Motivation

Table 1 suggests that the students are agreed 90.2% (A=40.4%, SA=49.8%), neutral 6.2% and disagreed 3.6%(DA=1.2%, SDA=2.4%) with statement “English will help me acquire new ideas and broaden my outlook”. the students are agreed 70.0%(A=31.8%, SA=38.2%), neutral 18.0% and disagreed 12.0% (DA=8.4%, SDA=3.6%) with statement “English will enable me to better understand and appreciate English culture”. the students are agreed 90.2%(A=40.4%, SA=49.8%), neutral 6.2% and disagreed 3.6%(DA=1.2%, SDA=2.4%) with statement “I am interested in English music”. the students are agreed 90.2%(A=40.4%, SA=49.8%), Neutral 6.2% and disagreed 3.6%(DA=1.2%, SDA=2.4%) with statement “I can learn more about the world through learning English”. All four statements for their integrative orientations of motivation and average mean scores for each statement ranges from 3.45 to 4.34 for learning English language. 

Table 2. Students’ Instrumental Orientations of Motivation

Table 2 indicates that the students are agreed 81.4%(A=30.2%, SA=51.2%), neutral 10.0% and disagreed 8.8%(DA=6.4%, SDA=2.4%) with statement “English is necessary to get a good job”. the students are agreed 74.4%(A=44.8%, SA=29.6%), neutral 18.0% and disagreed 7.6%(DA=6.4%, SDA=1.2%) with statement “English is essential to be active in society”. the students are agreed 83.2%(A=22.8%, SA=60.4%), neutral 9.4% and disagreed 7.4%(DA=3.8, SDA=3.6%) with statement “English will help me if I should ever travel abroad”. the students are agreed 70.8%(A=42.4%, SA=28.4%), neutral 21.6% and disagreed 7.6%(DA=5.2%, SDA=2.4%) with statement “English is essential for personal development”. the students are agreed 83.2%(A=36.4%, SA=46.8%), neutral 9.6% and disagreed 7.2%(DA=2.4%, SDA=4.8%) with statement “English will be helpful for my future career”. the students are agreed 80.8%(A=50.8%, SA=30.0%), neutral 11.2% and disagreed 7.8%(DA=5.6%, SDA=2.4%) with statement “English will help me to pass my exams and graduate from the college”. The students are agreed with all six items for their instrumental orientations of motivation and average mean scores for each statements ranges from 3.89 to 4.32 for learning English language.

Table 3. Students’ Resultative Orientations of Motivation

Table 3 indicates that the students are agreed 69.6% (A=43.2%, SA=26.4%), neutral 20.4% and disagreed 10.0%(DA=6.4%, SDA=3.6%) with statement “I like to discuss something in English but not in first language”. the students are agreed 74.6%(A=40.4%, SA=34.2%), neutral 19.8% and disagreed 5.7% (DA=3.8%, SDA=1.9%) with statement “I enjoy discussions in English class”. the students are agreed 70.8% (A=34.6%, SA=36.2%), neutral 17.8% and disagreed 11.4% (DA=9.6%, SDA=1.8%) with statement “It is important to use a course book in class”. The students are agreed with all three items for their resultative orientations of motivation and average mean scores for each statements ranges from 3.39 to 4.01 for learning English language.

Table 4. Students’ Intrinsic Orientations of Motivation

Table 4 reveals that the students are agreed 90.2% (A=40.4%, SA=49.8%), neutral 6.2% and disagreed 3.6% (DA=1.2%, SDA=2.4%) with statement “I feel freer to express myself in English than I do in first language”. the students are agreed 70.0%(A=31.8%, SA=38.2%), neutral 18.0% and disagreed 12.0% (DA=8.4%, SDA=3.6%) with statement “I try to use English as much as possible in class time”. the students are agreed 90.2% (A=40.4%, SA=49.8%), neutral 6.2% and disagreed 3.6% (DA=1.2%, SDA=2.4%) with statement “I always enjoy learning English”. the students are agreed with all three items for their intrinsic orientations of motivation and average mean scores for each statement ranges from 3.93 to 4.21 for learning English language.

Table 5. Descriptive Statistics Orientation of Motivation to learn English

Table 5 implies that the students are highly motivated as mean scores of integrative (3.94) with SD (0.66) and SE of mean (0.052), intrumental (4.09) with SD (0.56) and SE of mean (0.044), resultative (3.74) with SD (0.68) and standard error of mean (0.054) and intrinsic (3.81) with SD (0.65) and standard error of mean (0.052) orientations of motivation for orientations of motivation to learn English.

Table 6. ANOVA for Comparison of Orientation of Motivation to learn English

Table 6 indicates the value of Analysis of Varience (ANOVA)  (F= 3.583, p= 0.014), p<0.05 so there is a statistically significant difference among orientations of motivation shown by the students to learn English.

Table 7. Post Hoc for Multiple Comparisons Orientation of Motivation to learn English

*. For significant difference level is 0.05.

Table 7 illustrates that the difference between interogative and instrumental,  interogative and resultative, and interogative and intrinsic orientations of motivation for students’ learning English language are not statistically significant as p=0.234, p=0.234, p=0.234, respectively are greater than 0.05. The difference between students’ instrumental and intrinsic orientations of motivation for learning English language is not statistically significant as p=0.074 is greater than 0.05 whereas the difference between students’ instrumental and intrinsic is statistically significant as p=0.010 is less than 0.05. The difference between other students’ resultative and intrinsic orientations of motivation is not statistically significant as p=0.897 is greater than 0.05.

The average mean scores for learning English language of students integrative, instrumental, resultative and intrinsic orientations of motivation for all statements are above average  (Table 1-5). High students’ orientations of motivation for learning English language show that the students during their education at university are more inclined to learn than their pervious education acquiring period (Table 6-7). These results are align with the results of (Aripin et al., 2008; Al Harthy, 2017). The motivational students are more proficient learners of second language (Kruidenier, 1985; Dornyei, 1994; Akram & Ghani, 2013). Corria (1999) pointed out that the understanding of the level of motivation of students is a prerequisite to improve their English learning.  Students’ interrogative motivation, orientation, and self-confidence to learn English as second are positively correlated (Clement et al., 1994; Yeung et al., 2011; Saranraj et al., 2016).