AN ANALYSIS OF STUDENTS’ MOTIVATION AND THEIR
ACHIEVEMENT IN LEARNING ENGLISH AT THE
DEPARTMENT OF ENGLISH EDUCATION
A Skripsi
Presented to the Faculty of Educational Sciences in Partial Fulfilment of the
Requirements for the Degree of S.Pd. (Strata 1) in English Education
by:
EKA NOVA PUTRI
11150140000071
DEPARTMENT OF ENGLISH EDUCATION
FACULTY OF EDUCATIONAL SCIENCES
SYARIF HIDAYATULLAH STATE ISLAMIC UNIVERSITY
JAKARTA
2019
i
ii
ENDORSEMENT SHEET
iii
STATEMENT OF AUTHENTICITY
iv
ABSTRACT
Eka Nova Putri. NIM. 11150140000071. An Analysis of Students’ Motivation
and Their Achievement in Learning English at the Department of English
Education. “Skripsi” of Department of English Education, The Faculty of
Educational Sciences, Syarif Hidayatullah State Islamic University Jakarta, 2019.
Advisors: 1. Siti Nurul Azkiyah, M.Sc., Ph.D.
2. Neneng Sunengsih, M.Pd.
Keywords: Motivation, Integrative Motivation, Instrumental Motivation
This study aims to analyze the dominant type of students’ motivation in
learning English and to investigate the difference in students’ achievement scores
(GPA) based on their motivation types. This study involved 89 students of batch
2018 at the Department of English Education, The Faculty of Educational Sciences,
Syarif Hidayatullah State Islamic University Jakarta. The method used in this study
was quantitative research methods with survey design. In this study, the writer used
20 items of Gardner’s Attitude and Motivation Test Battery to investigate students’
integrative and instrumental motivation in English language learning. The results
of this study revealed that 39 (43.8%) students have the integrative motivation and
50 (56.2%) students have instrumental motivation to learn English. Furthermore,
the writer did the statistical analysis to see the difference in GPA between the
students with integrative motivation and the students with instrumental motivation.
The mean score of the GPA of the integrative group was 3.2318 while the
instrumental group was 3.2424. The statistical analysis revealed that there was no
significant difference in GPA between students with integrative motivation and
students with instrumental motivation.
v
ABSTRAK
Eka Nova Putri. NIM. 11150140000071. Analisis Motivasi dan Pencapaian
Belajar Bahasa Inggris Siswa di Departemen Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris.
Skripsi, Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris, Fakultas Ilmu Tarbiyah dan Keguruan, UIN
Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta, 2019.
Pembimbing: 1. Siti Nurul Azkiyah, M.Sc., Ph.D.
2. Neneng Sunengsih, M.Pd.
Kata Kunci: Motivasi, Motivasi Integratif, Motivasi Instrumental
Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menganalisis jenis motivasi siswa yang
dominan dalam belajar bahasa Inggris dan untuk menyelidiki perbedaan dalam nilai
prestasi siswa (IPK) berdasarkan jenis motivasi mereka. Penelitian ini melibatkan
89 siswa angkatan 2018 di Departemen Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris, Fakultas Ilmu
Tarbiyah dan Keguruan, Universitas Islam Negeri Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta.
Metode yang digunakan dalam penelitian ini adalah metode penelitian kuantitatif
dengan desain survei. Dalam penelitian ini, penulis menggunakan 20 item Attitude
and Motivation Test Battery oleh Gardner untuk menyelidiki motivasi integratif dan
instrumental siswa dalam pembelajaran bahasa Inggris. Hasil penelitian ini
mengungkapkan bahwa 39 (43,8%) siswa memiliki motivasi integratif dan 50
(56,2%) siswa memiliki motivasi instrumental untuk belajar bahasa Inggris.
Selanjutnya, penulis melakukan analisis statistik untuk melihat perbedaan dalam
IPK antara siswa dengan motivasi integrative dan siswa dengan motivasi
instrumental. Nilai rata-rata IPK kelompok integratif adalah 3,2318 sedangkan
kelompok instrumental adalah 3,2424. Hasil analisis statistik menunjukkan bahwa
tidak ada perbedaan signifikan dalam IPK antara siswa dengan motivasi integratif
dan siswa dengan motivasi instrumental.
vi
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
In the Name of God, Most Gracious, Most Merciful
Praise be to God, who has given His Blessing and Mercy to the writer in
completing the last assignment in her study. Blessing and Peace be upon to the
Prophet Muhammad, with his relatives, his companions, and also his followers.
With boundless love and appreciation, the writer would like to express her
gratitude and appreciation to the people who helped her during her study. Foremost,
to her beloved parents, Husaini and Siti Nurhayati; and to her siblings, Nazwa
Syabilah and Nahya Bergitta Lova, for the valuable support, prayers, affection, and
encouragement to the writer in everything, especially in writing this Skripsi.
Secondly, the writer would like to express her sincere and warm gratitude
to her advisors Siti Nurul Azkiyah, M.Sc., Ph.D. and Neneng Sunengsih, M.Pd.,
whose expertise, guidance and advice that have helped the writer bring this study
into success.
Also, the writer would like to take this opportunity to extend her gratitude
to the following:
1. Dr. Sururin, M.Ag. as the Dean of the Faculty of Educational Sciences.
2. Didin Nuruddin Hidayat, MA. TESOL., Ph.D. as the Chief of the
Department of English Education.
3. Zaharil Anasy, M.Hum as the Secretary of the Department of English
Education.
4. Drs. Nasifuddin Jalil, M.Ag. as the academic advisor of B Class of batch
2015.
5. All of the lecturers at the Department of English Education, who have
shared the invaluable knowledge, inspiration, and guidance.
6. The students of Class A, B, and C at the Department of English Education
of batch 2018, who were willing to help the writer by participating in this
study.
7. All friends at the Department of English Education batch 2015, especially
B Class.
vii
8. The close friends; DW, Colenak Family, and 1Rules Organizer, for the
friendship, support, and encouragement.
Also, to everyone who has helped the writer, whom cannot be
mentioned one by one. The writer hopes and wishes for every single person
who has helped her during her academic life to always be given the Blessings
of Allah. The writer notices that this Skripsi is far from perfection. Therefore,
the writer would be delighted to receive constructive comments and
suggestions from the reader to construct a better research paper in the future.
Jakarta, October 2019
The Writer
Eka Nova Putri
viii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
APPROVAL SHEET ............................................................................................. i
ENDORSEMENT SHEET ................................................................................... ii
STATEMENT OF AUTHENTICITY ................................................................ iii
ABSTRACT .......................................................................................................... iv
ABSTRAK ............................................................................................................. v
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ................................................................................... vi
TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................................................................... viii
LIST OF TABLES ................................................................................................ x
LIST OF FIGURES ............................................................................................. xi
LIST OF APPENDICES .................................................................................... xii
CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION ........................................................................ 1
A. Background of the Study ................................................................................ 1
B. Identification of the Problem .......................................................................... 5
C. Limitation of the Problem ............................................................................... 5
D. Formulation of the Problem ............................................................................ 5
E. The Objective of the Study ............................................................................. 6
F. The Significance of the Study ......................................................................... 6
CHAPTER II: LITERATURE REVIEW ........................................................... 7
A. Motivation ...................................................................................................... 7
1. Definition of Motivation .............................................................................. 7
2. Different Types of Motivation ..................................................................... 9
3. Measurement of Motivation....................................................................... 13
4. The Importance of Motivation in Language Learning ............................... 15
B. Language Learning Achievement ................................................................. 16
C. Motivation and Language Learning Achievement ....................................... 19
D. Previous Studies ........................................................................................... 21
E. Thinking Framework .................................................................................... 24
CHAPTER III: RESEARCH METHODS........................................................ 26
A. Place and Time of the Study ......................................................................... 26
ix
B. Design of the Study ...................................................................................... 26
C. Population and Sample of the Study ............................................................. 26
D. The Instrument of the Study ......................................................................... 27
E. Data Collection Technique............................................................................ 28
F. Data Analysis Technique .............................................................................. 29
CHAPTER IV: RESULTS AND ANALYSIS .................................................. 32
A. Data Description ........................................................................................... 32
1. Students’ Motivation Score ....................................................................... 32
2. Students’ Achievement Scores .................................................................. 33
B. Data Analysis and Interpretation .................................................................. 36
1. Normality Test ........................................................................................... 36
2. Homogeneity Test ...................................................................................... 39
3. Independent Samples Test ......................................................................... 39
C. Discussion ..................................................................................................... 41
CHAPTER V: CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION ..................................... 44
REFERENCES .................................................................................................... 46
APPENDICES ..................................................................................................... 49
x
LIST OF TABLES
Table 2.1 Five Views of Motivation ..................................................................... 10
Table 2.2 A Range of Assessment for English Language Learners at Each Level
of Implementation ................................................................................................. 17
Table 3.1 The Specification of the Questionnaire Items ....................................... 27
Table 3.2 The Reliability of the Instrument .......................................................... 28
Table 3.3 The Interpretation of Motivational Level ............................................. 30
Table 4.1 The Frequency and Percentages of Students Based on their Motivation
Type....................................................................................................................... 32
Table 4.2 The Descriptive Statistics of the Students’ GPA of the Integrative
Group .................................................................................................................... 33
Table 4.3 The Descriptive Statistics of the Students’ GPA of the Instrumental
Group .................................................................................................................... 34
Table 4.4 The Result of the Normality Test .......................................................... 37
Table 4.5 The Result of the Test of Homogeneity of Variances ........................... 39
Table 4.6 The Group Statistics .............................................................................. 39
Table 4.7 The Results of the Independent Samples Tests ..................................... 40
xi
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 4.1 The Frequency of Students’ GPA of the Integrative Group ................ 35
Figure 4.2 The Frequency of Students’ GPA of the Instrumental Group ............. 35
Figure 4.3 The Normal Distribution Curve of GPA of the Integrative Group ...... 38
Figure 4.4 The Normal Distribution Curve of GPA of the Instrumental Group ... 38
xii
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix 1 Preliminary Study Interview ............................................................. 49
Appendix 2 Motivation Questionnaire .................................................................. 51
Appendix 3 Content Validity of the Questionnaire............................................... 56
Appendix 4 The Validity of the Questionnaire Items ........................................... 58
Appendix 5 Table r................................................................................................ 59
Appendix 6 Students’ Motivation Score ............................................................... 60
Appendix 7 Surat Bimbingan Skripsi .................................................................... 63
Appendix 8 Surat Izin Penelitian .......................................................................... 65
Appendix 9 Reference Examination Paper ........................................................... 66
1
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
A. Background of the Study
It is an undeniable fact that knowledge of the English language has become
an essential part of people's daily life. It is shown that English is used in various
areas such as business, education, media, and entertainment. Primarily, English is
used as a tool for international communication. English is also the dominant
language in the business field so learning English becomes necessarily important
for people who intend to join a global marketplace. Additionally, many world's
popular movies, books, music and also content on the internet are mostly produced
in English. Furthermore, English is used as the first language by more than 300
million people meanwhile 750 million people speak English as the second
language.1
Furthermore, as English becomes popular, it has begun to be taught and
learned by a lot of people.2 People may have different motives to learn English. It
can be for academic reasons or for getting a good career. Garg mentions that there
are several reasons for learning English such as to communicate with people
throughout the world, to push career forward, to get access to knowledge or to enjoy
art and literature.3
As a global language, English has different roles in every country. For
instance, English in the United States of America is the first language which is also
called the mother tongue. In second language situations, English is used in official
institutions, education, mass media, large commercial and industrial organizations
as in Ghana and Singapore.4 Meanwhile, English in Indonesia is considered as a
1 M. Samanth Reddy, Importance of English Language in today’s World, International
Journal of Academic Research, 2016, pp. 179-183. 2 Gonca Altmisdort, An Analysis of Language Teacher Education Programs: A
Comparative Study of Turkey and Other European Countries, English Language Teaching, 9(8),
2016, p. 213. 3 Sunil Garg & Archana Gautam, Learning English can change your life for the better,
International Journal of English Language, Literature and Humanities, III(2), 2015, p. 565. 4 Geoffrey Broughton et. al., Teaching English as a Foreign Language Second Edition,
(Abingdon: Taylor & Francis e-Library, 2003), pp. 4-6.
2
foreign language. It means that English is taught in schools but it does not perform
an essential role in national or social life as in second language situations.5 In
Indonesia, many people are interested in learning English and willing to pay a lot
of cash to join an English course.6
In contrast, English learning in schools and universities cannot be
considered as successful. In the high school level, English is only offered four times
a week. While in universities, it is only offered once a week for two credits.
Although different teaching methods were used, the success has not achieved yet.7
Although success in the teaching of English has not yet achieved, researchers have
revealed that many EFL learners have succeeded in accomplishing good capability
in English. It has also occurred in Indonesia, where some EFL learners have
succeeded to become competent in the English language.8
Nevertheless, the success of students in language learning is affected by
their motivation to learn. Motivation is one of the many factors that influence
students in learning English. Motivation guides students to follow aims and
direction. Hence, motivation has an important role in language learning. Students
who lack motivation may have some difficulties to obtain effective learning.9
Regarding the importance of motivation in language learning, there were
several problems found. For instance, some students considered English as a
difficult subject. As a result, they did not engage in the class and exposed poor
attitudes in studying English. Additionally, some students were unsatisfied because
they have learned English for many years but they still find it difficult to
communicate using English.10 Although many factors affect students' achievement
in learning English, motivation also plays a vital role.
5 Ibid., p. 6. 6 Julia Eka Rini, English in Indonesia: Its position among other languages in Indonesia,
Beyond Words, 2(2), 2014, p. 26. 7 Ibid., p. 29. 8 Masyhur, Influence of Motivation and Language Learning Environment on the Successful
EFL Learning, Proceedings of the Fourth International Seminar on English Language and Teaching
(ISELT-4), 2016, p. 88. 9 Mitra Alizadeh, The Impact of Motivation on English Language Learning, International
Journal of Research in English Education, 1(1), 2016, p. 11. 10 Adila Jefiza, Students’ Motivation and Attitudes Toward Learning English in an English
Course, Journal of Language, Literature and Education, XII(12), 2017, p. 2.
3
Furthermore, motivation in language learning is categorized into two types
namely integrative and instrumental motivation. Students who have integrative
motivation not only concerned to learn a language but also to learn the culture of
the people of the target language. Whereas students who have instrumental
motivation learn a language by considering several purposes such as for getting a
job or earning money. Those kinds of motivation can affect the learning process
and its outcome. 11 According to Broughton, many learners tend to have
instrumental motivation for learning English as a foreign language, such as to travel
to England or to communicate with English-speaking friends.12 Moreover, Gardner
states that the type of motivation explains the reason why students are learning a
language. The reasons could be: to be able to communicate with people of the target
language, to obtain a job, to please parents, et cetera.13 It can be inferred that
students’ objectives to learn a language reflect their type of motivation.
Moreover, motivation is also distinguished as intrinsic and extrinsic
motivation. The term intrinsic motivation refers to the act of doing something due
to its satisfaction, while the term extrinsic motivation means the human tendency
to perform an activity to gain some purposes. 14 From those views, it can be
considered that the term instrumental motivation is quite similar to extrinsic
motivation, while the integrative motivation has a similarity with intrinsic
motivation.
Over the years, motivation in both second and foreign language learning has
been investigated by many researchers. It has been revealed that motivation is one
of the factors which distinguish learners and affect learning achievement.15 To
illustrate, in 2018, Nailufar researched the main types of students' motivation in
11 R. C. Gardner, Integrative Motivation: Past, Present, and Future, Temple University
Japan, Distinguished Lecturer Series, Tokyo, February 17, 2001; Osaka, February 24, 2001, p. 10.
retrieved from https://publish.uwo.ca/~gardner/ 12 Broughton, op. cit., p. 7. 13 R. C. Gardner, Social Psychology and Second Language Learning: The Role of Attitudes
and Motivation, (London: Edward Arnold Ltd, 1985), p. 51. 14 Richard M. Ryan & Edward L. Deci, Self-Determination Theory and the Facilitation of
Intrinsic Motivation, Social Development, and Well-Being, American Psychologist, 55(1), 2000, p.
71. 15 Richard DLC. Gonzales, Motivational Orientation in Foreign Language Learning: The
Case of Filipino Foreign Language Learners, TESOL Journal Vol. 3, 2010, p. 3.
4
majoring in English and Arabic at UIN Ar-Raniry in Banda Aceh. The researcher
attempted to find out any similarities or dissimilarities in the main types of students’
motivation in each major. The research revealed that students’ integrative
motivation in learning English was higher than the instrumental motivation. The
research findings indicated that there was no difference in the main types of students’
motivation between English and Arabic major.16
Also, Widesti in 2016 conducted a study to investigate the type of
motivation had by fresh year students of the English Language Education program
at the Faculty of Language and Literature, Satya Wacana Christian University. The
research finding discovered that students had slightly higher instrumental
motivation rather than integrative motivation, which occurred due to their
environment. Furthermore, the result also revealed that students had a high degree
of motivational level, which means they were highly motivated to learn English.17
In the present study, the writer attempted to investigate the dominant type
of students’ motivation in learning English at the Department of English Education
in the Faculty of Educational Sciences, Syarif Hidayatullah State Islamic University
Jakarta. Before conducting the study, the writer had interviewed three students in
the first year studying at the Department of English Education. The writer found
out that two students have integrative motivation in English language learning while
a student has instrumental motivation. The students who have integrative
motivation expressed that they learn the language because they have an interest in
both the language and the culture of its community of people. One of the students
mentioned that she used to have penpals from English-speaking countries.
Meanwhile, the student who has instrumental motivation expressed that learning
English was her last option because she was having an interest in another field of
knowledge. She added that learning English will help her to study abroad.
As has been mentioned, motivation is one of several factors that affect
students' learning achievement. Therefore, the writer analyzed students' grade point
16 Yuyun Nailufar, Analysis of Motivations to Study English and Arabic, ENGLISH
EDUCATION JOURNAL (EEJ), 9(2), 2018, pp. 328-344. 17 Happy Widesti, Motivation in English Language Learning of English Department Fresh
Year Students, Thesis of Satya Wacana Christian University Salatiga, 2016.
5
average (GPA) as their learning achievement score to investigate whether there is a
significant difference in GPA of students based on their type of motivation. Based
on the explanation, the writer conducted research entitled “An Analysis of
Students’ Motivation and Their Achievement in Learning English at the
Department of English Education.”
B. Identification of the Problem
Regarding the background of the study, the writer identified several
problems as follows:
1. Many Indonesian students are interested in learning English, but English
learning in Indonesia cannot be considered as successful.
2. Some students lack motivation in learning English and they exposed poor
attitudes in English class.
3. Students' achievement in learning English is influenced by different types of
motivation.
C. Limitation of the Problem
Based on the problem identification, the writer limits this study on the
students’ motivation types and their achievement in learning English at the
Department of English Education at the Faculty of Educational Sciences at Syarif
Hidayatullah State Islamic University Jakarta in Academic year 2018/2019.
D. Formulation of the Problem
This study was carried out at the first-year students of the Department of
English Education at the Faculty of Educational Sciences at Syarif Hidayatullah
State Islamic University Jakarta in the Academic year 2018/2019. This study
addressed these research questions:
1. What is the dominant type of motivation which affects students in learning
English?
2. Is there a significant difference in GPA of students based on their type of
motivation?
6
E. The Objective of the Study
This study aims to obtain two purposes as follows:
1. To identify whether students are highly affected by integrative or instrumental
motivation in learning English.
2. To investigate whether there is a significant difference in GPA of students based
on their type of motivation.
F. The Significance of the Study
This study is concerned about motivation as a factor that influences students
in learning English as a foreign language. By conducting this research, the writer
expects that the result will be beneficial. Furthermore, the significance of this study
is divided into:
1. Theoretical Significance
This study provides information related to the students’ motivation in
learning English at the Department of English Education. The writer expects that
the result of this study will be one of many references for further researchers in
investigating motivation in learning English as a foreign language.
2. Practical Significance
Motivation has been the subject studied by many researchers over the years.
Therefore, this study is expected to contribute knowledge about students’
motivation in English language learning.
7
CHAPTER II
LITERATURE REVIEW
A. Motivation
1. Definition of Motivation
The term motivation is defined in many different ways by researchers.
Commonly, motivation is defined as an internal condition that controls human
behavior. Woolfolk mentions that there are five fundamental questions which have
been focused by psychologists who are studying motivation. The first question is
“what choices do people make about their behavior?” For example, what makes
some students focus on their homework while other students play video game? The
second, “how long does it take to get started?” For example, some students do their
homework immediately while other students delay doing the homework. The third,
what is the intensity or level of involvement in the chosen activity?” It asks how
much is the person engaged in the activity. The fourth, “what causes someone to
persist or to give up?” It asks the factors which cause someone either to maintain
or to stop doing the activity. The fifth, “what is the person thinking and feeling
while engaged in the activity?” It asks what kind of feeling which the person have
in doing the activity.1
According to Santrock, motivation entails the processes which energize,
control and maintain behavior.2 It is also considered as the reason for an individual
in doing something or behaving in a specific way. Furthermore, motivation is
considered as a process to instigate and to maintain goal-directed activity.
Motivation involves goals that give stimulus and direction for individuals to do
certain actions. Additionally, motivation requires both physical and mental activity.
Physical activity involves overt actions such as effort and persistence, while mental
activity involves cognitive actions such as scheduling, practicing, establishing,
monitoring, making decisions, and assessing progress. Moreover, motivation can
1 Anita Woolfolk, Educational Psychology, (Harlow: Pearson Education, 2016), p. 470. 2 John W. Santrock, Educational Psychology, (New York: McGraw-Hill, 2011), p. 438.
8
influence both new learning and the performance of skills which have been
previously learned, strategies, and behaviors.3
According to Ryan and Deci, “Motivation concerns energy, direction,
persistence and equifinality—all aspects of activation and intention.” Motivation is
highly valued in the real world because of its consequences. Motivation drives
people to act with different kinds of factors. For instance, people do an activity
because they consider it an important or enjoyable thing. People can also act
because of their interests or because of their sense of personal commitment to
surpass something or from fear of being surveilled.4
Additionally, Ushioda states that “motivation is widely recognized as a
variable of importance in human learning, reflected in goals and directions pursued,
levels of effort invested, depth of engagement, and degree of persistence in learning.”
In L2 learning research, those aspects connected with mental process are the most
important part of the analysis of motivation. Meanwhile, the conceptual
frameworks of L2 motivation theories have reformed and developed over the past
fifty years. The theories generally pursue to define and investigate the reasons why
people want or do not want to learn a language, and how far they persevere and
succeed in the attempt.5
In conclusion, motivation is a psychological construct which functions as
an internal state which leads individuals to accomplish specific goals. Motivation
involves both mental and physical action. It works as a motive for doing something,
which is usually associated with excitement. Motivation in human learning is
commonly considered as an important variable, which is reflected in goals and
directions, effort, engagement, and persistence.
3 Dale H. Schunk, Paul R. Pintrich, & Judith L. Meece, Motivation in Education: Theory,
Research, and Applications third Edition, (New Jersey: Pearson Education, 2008), pp. 4-5. 4 Richard M. Ryan & Edward L. Deci, Self-Determination Theory and the Facilitation of
Intrinsic Motivation, Social Development, and Well-Being, American Psychologist, 55(1), 2000, p.
69. 5 D. Lasagabaster, A. Doiz, & J. M. Sierra (Eds), Motivation and Foreign Language
Learning: From theory to practice, (Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Co., 2014) p. 31.
9
2. Different Types of Motivation
In Self-Determination Theory, Ryan and Deci distinguish motivation based
on the different reasons or goals in doing an activity. The distinction is known as
intrinsic and extrinsic motivation, which indicate a certain contrast on individual
behavior.6
a. Intrinsic Motivation
Intrinsic motivation is defined as the undertaking of an activity for its
essential satisfactions instead of some separable consequences. In other words, an
individual who is intrinsically motivated performs an activity due to the enjoyment
or challenge of the activity rather than because of external rewards. Intrinsic
motivation has become known as an important phenomenon for educators.
Furthermore, intrinsic motivation results in high-quality learning and creativity,
therefore, it is essential to detail the factors and forces that stimulate or undermine
it.7
In addition, intrinsic motivation is the tendency of an individual to look for
and to conquer challenges, as people chase their personal interests and train their
capabilities. When an individual is intrinsically motivated, he or she does not need
incentives or punishments, because the activity itself is pleasing and fulfilling. 8
b. Extrinsic Motivation
Extrinsic motivation is a contrasting form of intrinsic motivation. It is a
construct that exists on any occasion that an individual does an activity to achieve
some purposes. 9 For instance, a student has a motivation to learn something
because he needs to obtain good grades, to avoid punishment, or to please the
teacher or parents. It means that the student is affected by extrinsic motivation, in
which he is not interested in the learning itself. Extrinsic motivation is usually
connected with negative emotions or poor academic achievement.10 Traditionally,
6 Richard M. Ryan & Edward L. Deci, Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivations: Classic
Definitions and New Directions, Contemporary Educational Psychology, 2000. p. 55. 7 Ibid., p. 56 8 Woolfolk, op. cit., p. 471. 9 Ryan & Deci, op. cit., p. 60. 10 Woolfolk, loc. cit.
10
extrinsic motivation is seen as something that can undermine intrinsic motivation.
It has been confirmed by several studies that if students have to do an activity
because of some extrinsic factors, they will lose their natural interest in doing it.11
In addition, there are five general approaches to motivation: behavioral,
humanistic, cognitive, social cognitive, and sociocultural approaches. Based on the
behavioral view, student motivation in the classroom is influenced by rewards and
incentives. It appears that the main source of students’ motivation comes through
extrinsic means. From the humanistic view, intrinsic factors are the source of
motivation as human needs for self-actualization, the inborn actualizing tendency,
or the need for self-determination. In contrast to the behavioral views, cognitive
theories emphasize intrinsic motivation as the source of human behavior. According
to cognitive theorists, “behavior is determined by our thinking, not simply by
whether we have been rewarded or punished for the behavior in the past.” In social
cognitive theories, motivation is considered as a product of two main forces:
individuals’ expectation of achieving goals and individuals’ value of that goals.
Meanwhile, sociocultural views of motivation emphasize participation in
community of practice. To illustrate, people involved in activities in order to
preserve their identities and to keep their relations within the community. 12
Moreover, those five theories are summarized in the following table.
Table 2.1
Five Views of Motivation13
Behavioral Humanistic Cognitive
Social
Cognitive
Socio
cultural
Source of
Motivation
Extrinsic Intrinsic Intrinsic Intrinsic
and
Extrinsic
Intrinsic
11 Zoltán Dörnyei & Ema Ushioda, Teaching and Researching Motivation Second Edition,
(Harlow: Pearson Education Limited, 2011), p. 24. 12 Woolfolk, op.cit., p. 474. 13 Ibid.
11
Important
Influences
Reinforcers,
rewards,
incentives,
and
punishers
Need for
self-esteem,
self-
fulfillment,
and self-
determinati
on
Beliefs,
attribution
for success
and
failure,
expectatio
ns
Goals,
expectation
,
intentions,
self-
efficacy
Engaged
participation
in learning
communities
; maintaining
identity
through
participation
in activities
of group
Key
Theorists
Skinner Maslow,
Deci
Weiner,
Graham
Locke &
Latham,
Bandura
Lave,
Wenger
Furthermore, Gardner and Lambert construct a socio-psychological theory
of second or foreign language learning. They express that “the learner’s
ethnocentric tendencies and his attitudes toward the members of the groups are
believed to determine how successful he will be, relatively, in learning the
language.” The learners’ motivation is assumed to be determined by his attitudes
and his orientations toward the learning task, whether it is integrative or
instrumental.14
a. Integrative Motivation
Integrative motivation is a reflection of an individual genuine interest in
language learning. An individual who has integrative motivation tends to learn a
language because it will help him to get engage with the native speaker or to learn
the language to gain friends who speak the language. Gardner categorized these
reasons as integrative reasons, which seems to reflect an interest to become
14 R.C. Gardner & Wallace E. Lambert, Attitudes and Motivation in Second-Language
Learning, (Rowley: Newbury House Publishers, 1972), p. 3.
12
integrated with the people who speaks the language. 15 Integrative motivation
reflects “a high level of drive on the part of the individual to acquire the language
of a valued second-language community in order to facilitate communication with
that group.” It is connected with several components such as interest in foreign
languages; desire to learn the target language; attitudes toward the learning
situation; desire to interact with the target language community; and attitudes
toward the target language community. 16
Furthermore, Gardner expressed that the understanding of an integrative
motive suggests that success in second language learning depends on the learner's
particular orientation, which is reflecting the will or desires of the learners to be
typical associates of the language community, and to become connected with that
community, at least vicariously.17
b. Instrumental Motivation
Instrumental motivation is the contrasting form of integrative motivation
toward the language learning tasks, which is characterized by a desire to gain social
acknowledgment or financial advantages by means the knowledge of a foreign
language.18 Dornyei expresses that instrumental motivation reflects the learner’s
interest in language learning which is connected to the practical benefits of language
proficiency, such as getting a better job or a higher salary.19
Moreover, Gardner states that the goals in instrumental motivation do not
include any identification or a feeling of closeness or friendship with the target
language people but more focus on a practical purpose of learning the language for
the individual such as for obtaining a good job or for studying abroad. It does not
imply that the individual who learn a second or foreign language wants to become
particularly close to the native speakers in an emotional sense.20 In other words,
15 R. C. Gardner, Integrative Motivation: Past, Present, and Future, Temple University
Japan, Distinguished Lecturer Series, Tokyo, February 17, 2001; Osaka, February 24, 2001, pp. 9-
10. retrieved from https://publish.uwo.ca/~gardner/ 16 Dörnyei, Conceptualizing Motivation in Foreign-Language Learning, Language
Learning, 40(1), 1990, p. 46. 17 Gardner & Lambert, op.cit., p. 14. 18 Ibid. 19 Dörnyei, loc. cit. 20 Gardner, op. cit., p. 10.
13
instrumental motivation reflects the practical worth and advantages of learning a
new language.
Regarding the classifications, it can be inferred that extrinsic motivation is
correlated to instrumental motivation, which reflects an individual’s purposes of
achieving something. Meanwhile, intrinsic motivation is correlated to integrative
motivation, which reflects an individual’s persistence in learning due to internal
factors.21
In summary, motivation is classified into two types namely intrinsic and
extrinsic motivation. The term intrinsic motivation refers to the motives of
performing an activity which come from internal desires, due to the satisfaction or
enjoyment of doing the activity. While extrinsic motivation refers to the motives to
do something as a means to achieve particular goals. In this study, the writer uses
the concept of motivation in language learning namely integrative and instrumental
motivation. The term integrative refers to the orientation of learner, which reflects
a genuine interest in the language and its culture of the community who speak the
language. In contrast, the term instrumental motivation refers to the desires of
learners to learn a language to gain specific goals such as economic advancement
or social recognition.
3. Measurement of Motivation
As a psychological construct, motivation cannot be directly observed or
recorded. Therefore, in determining to measure motivation, a researcher needs to
understand what kind of motivation which he attempts to measure. Motivation can
be measured through three kinds of aspects such as cognitive, affective, and
behavioral measures. Cognitive measures include memory accessibility,
evaluations, and perceptions of goal-relevant objects. Affective measures involve
subjective experience. While behavioral measures include speed, performance, and
21 A. Torabi & A.R.N Tabrizi, The Relationship between Instrumental, Integrative,
Intrinsic, and Extrinsic Motivations and the Lexical-oriented Knowledge among Intermediate
Iranian EFL Learners, Journal of Applied Linguistics and Language Research, 3(6), 2016, p. 321.
14
choice to capture fluctuations in motivational strength.22 Motivation in learning can
be observed through some aspects such as duration, attitudes, frequency,
consistency, persistence, loyalty, visions, and learning achievement.23
Several tools can be used to measure students' motivation such as
performance tests, questionnaires, freewriting, achievement tests, and scales. These
tools are described as follows:
a. Performance tests are used to obtain information related to loyalty,
solemnity, targeting, awareness, duration, and frequency of activities;
b. Questionnaires are used to grasp an understanding of persistence and
loyalty;
c. Freewriting is used to comprehend the information related to visions and
aspirations;
d. Achievement tests are used to understand students’ academic achievement;
and
e. Scales are used to understand students’ attitudes towards learning.24
Furthermore, Gardner and Lambert state that the value orientation of a
potential student of a foreign language can be estimated or measured through
structured interviews or carefully planned questionnaires.25
Additionally, Gardner has developed a research instrument to measure the
major affective aspects shown in second language learning, which is called The
Attitude/Motivation Test Battery (AMTB). It consists of scales measuring the
individual’s affective responses toward several groups and individuals and concepts
that are connected with the acquisition of second language. The original items of
the AMTB were developed by Gardner and extended by Gardner and Lambert in
1972 and has been used in many forms by different researchers. The composition
22 Maferima Touré-Tillery & Ayelet Fishbach, How to Measure Motivation: A Guide for
the Experimental Social Psychologist, Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 8(7), 2014, p.
328. 23 Cucu Suhana, Konsep Strategi Pembelajaran, (Bandung: Refika Aditama, 2014), p. 26. 24 Ibid. 25 Gardner & Lambert, op. cit., p. 14.
15
of the test battery varies from one form to another, depends on the intended purpose
of the investigators.26
In conclusion, to measure the motivational aspect of students in language
learning, researchers can use several instruments such as questionnaires or
interviews by considering what kind of motivation he tries to measure. Many
researchers have used and modified The Attitude/Motivation Test Battery to
measure motivation in language learning, in which the modification depends on the
intended purpose. In this study, the writer used and modified some items of the
AMTB to measure the dominant type of students’ motivation in English language
learning.
4. The Importance of Motivation in Language Learning
Motivation has been revealed as one of the important factors that influence
students in language learning. Dörnyei states that motivation is one of the main
determining factors of second/foreign language (L2) learning achievement. He also
states that there has been a significant amount of research investigating the nature
and role of motivation in second language learning.27
Gardner and Lambert express that “factors of an attitudinal and motivational
sort play very important roles in the acquisition of a second or foreign language in
a variety of North American contexts.”28 It indicates that research on attitudes and
motivation in second or foreign language learning in North America has revealed
that those factors have essential parts. Moreover, Gardner and Lambert took their
ideas about attitudes and motivation out of the North American context to foreign
settings. They conducted researches in the Philippines where the English language
has become a second national language and also a vital language for economic
advancement. The results of the research indicate that students who learn English
with an instrumental orientation and who receive parental support were successful
in developing the language proficiency. However, an integrative orientation toward
26 R.C. Gardner, The Attitude/Motivation Test Battery: Technical Report, Retrieved on
March 26, 2019, from https://publish.uwo.ca/~gardner/docs/AMTBmanual.pdf 27 Zoltan Dörnyei, Motivation and Motivating in the Foreign Language Classroom, The
Modern Language Journal, 8(3), 1994, p. 273. 28 Gardner & Lambert, op. cit., p. 134.
16
English learning had a striking effect on the proficiency of another subgroup of
Filipino students.29 Gardner and Lambert state that the significance of learning a
second language of national or worldwide is essential, and both instrumental and
integrative orientations towards language learning must be elaborated.30
Given the explanation above, it can be inferred that motivation plays an
essential part in students in language learning. As Ur stated that "motivation is very
strongly related to achievement in language learning."31 The concept of language
learning achievement, therefore, will be discussed in the following section.
B. Language Learning Achievement
Fundamentally, language is acquired by all people and is used for
communication.32 People in every country speak different languages. However, as
English has become a global language, it is used by many people to communicate
with other countries' people throughout the world. As a result, the importance of
English urged people to be able to communicate globally.33
Furthermore, students throughout the world are learning English for
different reasons. For instance, some students only learn English because it is on
the school curriculum but some students learn English because they think it is
advantageous for international communication. Students' purposes for learning will
bring an effect on what they want and need to learn and will influence what they
are taught.34
Moreover, Gottlieb illustrates a mapping assessment to measure students’
academic language proficiency and academic achievement. According to Gottlieb,
“Language proficiency is an expression of a student’s processing and use of
language within and across four language domains or modalities: listening,
29 Ibid., p. 141. 30 Ibid., p. 142. 31 Penny Ur, A Course in Language Teaching: Practice and theory, (Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 1991), p. 274. 32 H. Douglas Brown, Principles of Language Learning and Teaching, (New York:
Longman, 2000), p. 5. 33 M.Samanth Reddy, Importance of English Language in today’s World, International
Journal of Academic Research, Vol.3, Issue-4(2), 2016, p. 183. 34 Jeremy Harmer, How to Teach English, (Harlow: Pearson Education Limited, 2007), p.
11.
17
speaking, reading, and writing.” Meanwhile, “academic achievement reflects the
extent of a student’s subject matter knowledge, skills, and concepts for the core
content areas (in particular, in English language arts and mathematics) for his or her
grade or age.” It is a sign or standard of conceptual learning which is directly
connected to school-based curriculum and standards of state academic content.35
Furthermore, the mapping assessment is illustrated in the following table.
Table 2.2
A Range of Assessment for English Language Learners at Each Level of
Implementation
Construct Measuring Language
Proficiency
Measuring Academic
Achievement
Measurement
at the: Listening Speaking Reading Writing
Language
Arts Math Science
Social
Studies
State level State test of English language
proficiency
State tests of academic
achievement
District level Common/interim language
proficiency measures in English
(and another language for
students in dual language
programs)
Common/interim or
benchmark/end-of-course
achievement tests in English
(or the student’s home
language for subjects where
instruction is in the home
language)
Grade/depart
ment or
school level
• Interdisciplinary, thematic projects with standards-
referenced rubrics for language proficiency and academic
achievement
• Common performances, projects, or products with
integrated rubrics
35 Margo Gottlieb, Assessing English Language Learners: Bridges to Educational Equity,
(Corwin: A SAGE Company, 2016), p. 63.
18
Classroom
level
• Observation of use of
words/expressions with
multiple meanings in
context
• Academic conversations
with feedback
• Interviews or student-led
conferences
• Content-based writing
samples
• Informal reading
inventories
• Math-related charts and
graphs
• Science investigations
and reports
• Timelines of historical
events
In addition, students who are successful in language learning are those who
show certain characteristics that are connected with motivation. The characteristics
are (1) positive task orientation; (2) ego-involvement; (3) need for achievement; (4)
high aspirations; (5) goal orientation; (6) perseverance; and (7) tolerance of
ambiguity. Those characteristics are described as follows:
1. Positive task orientation indicates that a student has the willingness to deal
with tasks and challenges, and has the confidence to succeed.
2. Ego-involvement indicates that a student considers that it is important to be
successful in learning to keep and promote their positive self-image.
3. Need for achievement indicates that a student needs to achieve, to overcome
difficulties, and to succeed in learning.
4. High aspirations indicate that a student is ambitious and goes for demanding
challenges, high proficiency, and top grades.
5. Goal orientation indicates that a student is fully aware of the learning goals
or specific learning activities, and controls his efforts in achieving them.
6. Perseverance indicates that a student is consistent in investing a high level
of effort in learning and is not discouraged by difficulties.
19
7. Tolerance of ambiguity indicates that a student is not frustrated by situations
that involve a temporary lack of understanding or confusion.36
To sum up, students have various purposes for learning English, which will
give an effect on their needs to learn and also influence what they are taught. there
is a distinction between students’ language proficiency and academic achievement.
Language proficiency refers to the ability of students to use the language across
four language skills while academic achievement refers to the level of a students’
learning including subject matter knowledge, skills, and concepts for the core
content areas. Furthermore, some characteristics are connected to motivation,
owned by the most successful students in learning English. Those characteristics
are: positive task orientation, ego-involvement, need for achievement, high
aspirations, goal orientation, perseverance, and tolerance of ambiguity.
C. Motivation and Language Learning Achievement
Motivation is commonly described as having three psychological functions:
energizing or activating behavior, directing behavior, and regulating the persistence
of behavior. The first function illustrates what makes students engaged in learning.
For example, a student engaged in learning English to get a scholarship to study
abroad. The second function illustrates why action is chosen over another. For
example, a student does his English homework before doing other subject
homework. The third function illustrates why students persist toward goals. For
example, a student continues to learn English even though English is a difficult
language for her.37
Also, Gardner stated that motivation includes four aspects: a goal, effortful
behavior, a desire to accomplish the goal, and favorable attitudes toward the activity.
The four aspects are grouped into two conceptually distinct categories. The goal is
a component of motivation which is not measurable. It is a stimulus that increases
motivation. Furthermore, students' differences in motivation are reflected in the
36 Ur, op. cit., p. 275. 37 M Kay Alderman, Motivation for Achievement: Possibilities for Teaching and Learning
Second Edition, (New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc., 2004), p. 18.
20
three aspects mentioned above: effort to achieve the goal, desire to achieve the goal
and attitudes toward the activity in achieving the goal.38 In his study of foreign
language learning, Gardner used these three components in assessing motivation to
learn French, the components are reflected in the measures of motivational intensity,
desire to learn French, and attitudes toward learning French while the goal is
reflected in the individual’s orientation to language learning.39
According to Gardner, "the type of motivation answers the question of why
the individual is studying the language. It refers to the goal." There are many kinds
of goals or reasons for studying language such as to be able to speak with the
members of the language community, to obtain a job, to improve education, to
travel abroad, etc. Besides, Gardner stated that "once the reasons for second
language study have been clarified so that they reflect some ultimate goal, it is
possible to classify them. Once classified, the various categories would seem best
identified as orientations to maintain conceptual clarity." As a result, Gardner and
Lambert conceptualized two types of orientations known as an integrative and
instrumental orientation which have been discussed in the previous section. These
two orientations are part of the students' motivation at the goal level and influence
their core motivation. Both of the orientations may lead to success in language
achievement but lack of either may causes problems.40
Moreover, there have been several research strategies used to examine the
relationship between attitudinal and motivational measures to achievement in
second language learning. A class of studies involved the use of factor analysis. For
example, the early study of the correlation of attitudes and motivation to second
language achievement with the use of factor analysis was conducted by Gardner
and Lambert. In the study, Gardner and Lambert conducted the factor analysis on
the correlations among 14 variables which were obtained from 75 students studying
French as a second language. There were four factors obtained and two of them
38 R.C. Gardner, Social Psychology and Second Language Learning: The Role of Attitudes
and Motivation, (London: Edward Arnold Ltd, 1985), pp. 50-51. 39 Ibid., p. 51. 40 Alvyda Liuolienė and Regina Metiūnienė, Second Language Learning Motivation,
Santalka. Filologija. Edukologija, 14(2), 2006, p. 94.
21
were related to ratings of achievement. The result of the study indicated that
motivational factors established a relation between ethnic attitudes, orientation,
motivation, and second language achievement.41
Additionally, Bećirović investigated the relationship between gender,
motivation and achievement in learning English as a foreign language in Bosnian
Schools. The research findings revealed that there is a positive significant
relationship between motivation and achievement in learning English as a foreign
language. In terms of gender, the female group has higher and more significant
correlation between achievement and motivation rather than the male group.
Meanwhile, in terms of age, it was found that the youngest group of the participants
has the largest correlation between motivation achievement.42
In conclusion, motivation is considered as having three psychological
functions, to activate behavior, to direct behavior, and to regulate persistence of
behavior. These three functions are connected to four aspects involved in
motivation: a goal, effortful behavior, a desire to attain the goal, and favorable
attitudes toward the activity. Motivation is also connected to several aspects such
as attitudes, orientation, motivation and second language achievement which has
been examined through early studies.
D. Previous Studies
There are many previous studies which had been conducted concerning
students' motivation in learning English as a second or foreign language. The
following are several studies that are related and can be used as references for this
study.
The first, Manusak Degang examined the level and the dominant type of
English language learning motivation of 50 undergraduate students of Business
English major at an English-medium University. The researcher modified 20 items
of Gardner’s AMTB in which 10 items indicated the integrative motivation and the
41 Gardner, op. cit., pp. 63-64 42 Senad Bećirović, The Relationship between Gender, Motivation and Achievement in
Learning English as a Foreign Language, European Journal of Contemporary Education, 6(2), 2017,
pp. 216-217.
22
other 10 items indicated the instrumental motivation. In analyzing the data, the
researcher calculated the mean score of each motivation type and interpreted the
level of motivation. The results of the research revealed that the level of students’
motivation was relatively high. Furthermore, it was found out that the integrative
motivation was slightly outperformed the instrumental motivation of students in
learning English.43
The second, Kitjaroonchai conducted a study to examine the English
language learning motivation level of students in secondary and high school in
Saraburi province, Thailand. The researcher also aimed to investigate whether there
was a significant difference between the learning motivation of students with high
academic achievement (GPA ≥ 3.20) and students who achieved a GPA of less than
3.20. The study involved 266 students of the Faculty of Arts and Humanities of
Asia-Pacific International University. In collecting the data, the researcher used a
questionnaire and an open-ended question which was intended to investigate
students' difficulties in learning English. The research findings revealed that
students have a high motivation level in learning English. There are 48% of students
had a very high motivation level and 49% of students had a high motivation level
while 3% of them had average motivation levels in learning English. Furthermore,
the result revealed that students' instrumental motivation outperformed integrative
motivation in learning English. 44
The third, Widesti conducted a study to examine the motivation level of
fresh year students based on instrumental and integrative motivation. This research
involved 40 fresh year students of the English Language Education Program at the
Faculty of Language and Literature, Satya Wacana Christian University Salatiga.
To collect the data, the researcher used questionnaires adapted from Gardner’s
Attitude/Motivation Test Battery (AMTB). The research findings revealed that
students had high motivation in learning English. Moreover, the findings also
43 Manusak Degang, Motivation Toward English Language Learning of the Second Year
Undergraduate Thai Students Majoring in Business English at an English-Medium University,
Master’s Project of Srinakharinwirot University Bangkok, 2010. 44 Nakhon Kitjaroonchai, Motivation toward English language learning of students in
secondary and high schools in education service area office 4, Saraburi Province, Thailand,
International Journal of Language and Linguistic, 1(1), 2012, pp. 22-33.
23
revealed that students had slightly higher instrumental motivation rather than
integrative motivation.45
The fourth, Hong and Ganapathy conducted a case study to examine the
integrative and the instrumental of ESL students in learning English in a Chinese
school in Penang. The researchers used focus group discussions and 12 open-ended
questions as the instruments for collecting the data and used qualitative data
analysis to convert the qualitative data into explanation or interpretation forms. The
findings of the research revealed that instrumental motivation had a bigger impact
on students' English language learning. The result of the research also indicated that
vocabulary and grammar were the biggest problems encountered by the students in
the learning process in an ESL context.46
The fifth, Nailufar conducted a survey study to investigate the dominant
type of students’ motivation in majoring English and Arabic at UIN Ar-Raniry in
Banda Aceh. To collect the data, the researcher used questionnaires that were given
to 30 English major students and 30 Arabic major students. The results of this study
revealed that, in choosing English as a major, the students were mostly influenced
by integrative motivation rather than instrumental motivation. Arabic students were
also mainly influenced by the integrative motivation to learn Arabic.47
The previous studies mentioned above are concerning students' motivation
in English language learning in a different area. The similarity of this study with
those studies is investigating the dominant type of students' motivation in English
language learning. Furthermore, most of the studies followed quantitative research
procedures and used questionnaires in collecting the research data, unless a case
study conducted by Hong and Ganapathy, which is categorized as a qualitative
study. In this study, the writer analyzes the difference in students' achievement
scores based on their motivation type, which differs from the study conducted by
45 Happy Widesti, Motivation in English Language Learning of English Department Fresh
Year Students, Thesis of Satya Wacana Christian University Salatiga, 2016. 46 Yee Chee Hong & Malini Ganapathy, To Investigate ESL Students’ Instrumental and
Integrative Motivation towards English Language Learning in a Chinese School in Penang: Case
Study, English Language Teaching; 10(9), 2017, pp. 17-35. 47 Yuyun Nailufar, Analysis of Motivations to Study English and Arabic, ENGLISH
EDUCATION JOURNAL (EEJ), 9(2), 2018, pp. 328-344.
24
Kitjaroonchai. In his study, Kitjaroonchai investigated the difference between the
learning motivation of students with high achievement (GPA 3.20) and those of
students with GPA below 3.20.
E. Thinking Framework
English as an international language is widely used by many people
throughout the world. As it becomes popular, English is learned by a lot of people
with different reasons such as to communicate with the English-speaking
community, to study abroad, or to get a good career. In Indonesia, English has a
status as a foreign language and is taught in schools and universities. Many people
are concerned to join an English course and willing to pay a lot of money but the
success of the English language learning in Indonesia has not yet achieved despite
many efforts to expand the quality of the teaching process. However, some students
have become competent in the English language.
There are many influencing factors in the success of language learning. One
of them is motivation, which functions to guide students to follow directions and to
obtain goals. In language learning, motivation is distinguished into two types
known as the integrative and the instrumental motivation. Integrative motivation
refers to the students' orientation in learning a language due to their interest in the
culture of the target language community while instrumental motivation refers to
the orientation of students to learn a language to obtain specific purposes.
Many pieces of research about motivation in learning English have been
conducted over the years. It has been revealed that motivation is one of the many
factors that affect students' learning achievement. Students who are successful in
language learning are those who own typical characteristics that are connected to
motivation.
The type of students’ motivation indicates the purpose of the students to
learn a language. Therefore, in the present study, the writer attempts to investigate
the dominant type of students' motivation in learning English, whether it is
integrative or instrumental motivation. Moreover, the writer also identifies whether
there is a significant difference in grade point average between the integrative and
25
the instrumental group of students of batch 2018 at the Department of English
Education at the Faculty of Educational Sciences at Syarif Hidayatullah State
Islamic University Jakarta.
26
CHAPTER III
RESEARCH METHODS
A. Place and Time of the Study
This study was conducted at Syarif Hidayatullah State Islamic University
Jakarta which is located at Jl. Ir. H. Juanda No. 95 Ciputat, Tangerang Selatan. The
writer conducted the study in July 2019 in the 2018/2019 academic year.
B. Design of the Study
This study followed quantitative research procedures with survey design.
The quantitative data were obtained from questionnaires to find out the dominant
type of motivation possessed by students in learning English. Moreover, the writer
used students' Grade Point Average (GPA) to be analyzed to find out whether there
was a significant difference in students' achievement scores based on their type of
motivation.
C. Population and Sample of the Study
The writer carried out this study on the students of the Department of
English Education, Faculty of Educational Sciences, Syarif Hidayatullah State
Islamic University Jakarta. In this study, the technique used to select the sample
was a purposive sampling technique and the sample taken was 89 first-year students
of the Department of English Education in the academic year 2018/2019. As Cohen
explained that in purposive sampling, samples are chosen for specific purposes.1 In
this study, the writer had chosen three classes of first-year students majoring in
English education because they are still relevant in the inquiry and they might
indicate their dominant types of motivation in choosing to learn English because
someone's motivation in choosing study program is closely connected to their
motivation. 2 Therefore, the writer aimed to investigate the first-year students’
1 Louis Cohen, Lawrence Manion, and Keith Morrison, Research Methods in Education
Sixth Edition, (Oxon: Routledge, 2007), p. 115. 2 Choiril Anwar & Kurniawan Yudhi Nugroho, Students’ Motivations toward Choosing
English Education, Indonesian EFL Journal, 4(1), 2018, p. 58.
27
motivation in learning English at the Department of English education in the
academic year 2018/2019.
D. The Instrument of the Study
To investigate students' motivation in learning English, the writer used a
questionnaire as the research instrument. The questionnaire consisted of two parts.
The first part asked the general information of the participants, such as name,
gender, age, class, and grade point average. The demographic data of the students
were provided only as general information and were not analyzed further except the
grade point average items. The second part consisted of 20 items in which
participants are required to choose one of five options rated on the five-point Likert
scale ranging from strongly disagree to strongly agree. The questionnaire items
were adapted from Gardner’s Attitude/Motivation Test Battery.
1. Content Validity of the Instrument
To construct the questionnaire, the writer used 20 items referring to the
concept of integrative and instrumental motivation in learning English (See
Appendix 3). The following table presents the specification of the questionnaire
items:
Table 3.1
The Specification of the Questionnaire Items
Variable Motivation Type Items Number
Motivation Integrative 1, 2, 3, 7, 8, 9, 13, 14, 17, 18
Instrumental 4, 5, 6, 10, 11, 12, 15, 16, 19, 20
As shown on the table, 10 items are indicating integrative motivation and
10 items indicating instrumental motivation. Furthermore, to see whether or not the
questionnaire could measure students' type of motivation, a pilot study was required
to analyze the validity and reliability of the questionnaire.
2. Pilot Study
After constructing the research instrument, the next step was conducting a
pilot study to measure the validity and reliability of the questionnaire. In the pilot
28
study, the writer distributed the questionnaire to 30 students on the same population.
Furthermore, the results of the questionnaires were analyzed to see the validity and
reliability of the instrument.
a. The Validity of the Instrument
To analyze the validity of the items, the writer used Bivariate Correlation
through SPSS Statistics 24 program. If the Pearson correlation of the item is higher
than the 𝑟𝑡𝑎𝑏𝑙𝑒, it means that the item is significantly correlated to the total score,
which indicates that the item is valid. The 𝑟𝑡𝑎𝑏𝑙𝑒 for df= (N-2) with the significance
level of 0.05 (2-tailed) is 0.3610. The results of the calculation reveal that the
Pearson correlation of each item is above 0.3610, which indicates that all of the
items are valid (See Appendix 4).
b. The Reliability of the Instrument
The reliability of the research instrument is essential because it refers to the
consistency of the instrument. To analyze the reliability, the writer used Cronbach's
Alfa coefficient through IBM SPSS Statistics 24. The result of the reliability
analysis is presented on the table below:
Table 3.2
The Reliability of the Instrument
Cronbach's
Alpha
N of
Items
.927 20
Table 3.2 reveals that the Cronbach’s Alpha of the instrument is 0.927.
According to Cohen, the alpha coefficient above 0.90 is categorized as very highly
reliable.3 In other words, the research instrument is considered as reliable.
E. Data Collection Technique
To collect the data, the writer gained approval at the Department of English
Education to administer the study to the students of batch 2018. In this study, the
writer used the questionnaire for collecting the data to find out the dominant type
3 Cohen, op. cit., p. 506.
29
of students’ motivation in learning English. Furthermore, the writer obtained the
data of GPA through the questionnaire, in which the students were required to fill
out the GPA on the first part of the questionnaire.
F. Data Analysis Technique
The data in this study were analyzed through descriptive statistics and
statistical analysis. The steps for analyzing the data were described as follows:
1. Collecting the questionnaires which have been filled out by the participants.
2. Calculating the mean score of the integrative and the instrumental motivation
items of each student and also interpreting the motivational level to identify the
dominant type of motivation of each student. The higher a student's score on the
integrative measure, the more his motivation fits the integrative type. While, the
higher a student's score on the instrumental measure, the more his motivation
fits the instrumental type.4
3. Describing the dominant type of motivation based on the obtained data.
4. Grouping students into two groups based on their type of motivation to compare
their GPA by using Independent Samples t-test.
5. Testing the normality and homogeneity of the data of GPA as the requirements
of the parametric test.5
a. Normality Test
A normality test is a requirement of a parametric test to see whether
or not the data is having a normal distribution. In this study, the writer used
Kolmogorov-Smirnov test through SPSS 24 Program to see the normality
of the data. The hypotheses for the test of normality are formulated as
follows:
H0 = the data is normally distributed
H1 = the data is not normally distributed
4 R.C. Gardner & Wallace E. Lambert, Attitudes and Motivation in Second-Language
Learning, (Rowley: Newbury House Publishers, 1972), p. 21. 5 Rusydi Ananda & Muhammad Fadhli, Statistik Pendidikan (Teori Dan Praktik Dalam
Pendidikan), (Medan: CV. Widya Puspita, 2018), p. 158.
30
If sig. or p-value < (0.05), H0 is rejected and H1 is accepted, which
indicates that the data is not normally distributed.
If sig. or p-value > (0.05), H0 is accepted and H1 is rejected, which
indicates that the data is normally distributed.
b. Homogeneity Test
The test of homogeneity is used to see whether or not the data of two
groups have the same variances. In this study, the writer used Levene’s Test
to see the homogeneity of the variances through SPSS 24 Program. The
hypotheses are formulated as follows:
H0 = the data have the same variances
H1 = the data have different variances
If sig. or p-value < (0.05), H0 is rejected and H1 is accepted, which
indicates that the data have different variances.
If sig. or p-value > (0.05), H0 is accepted and H1 is rejected, which
indicates that the data have the same variances.
6. Conducting independent samples t-test.
To interpret the motivational level of each student, the writer used the
interpretation adapted from the interpretation procedure designed by Degang.6
Table 3.3
The Interpretation of Motivational Level
Scale Mean Range Motivational Level Score Range
5 Strongly agree Highest 4.50-5.00
4 Agree High 3.50-4.49
3 Neither agree nor disagree Moderate 2.50-3.49
2 Disagree Low 1.50-2.49
1 Strongly disagree Lowest 1.00-1.49
6 Manusak Degang, Motivation Toward English Language Learning of the Second Year
Undergraduate Thai Students Majoring in Business English at an English-Medium University,
Master’s Project of Srinakharinwirot University Bangkok, 2010, p. 23.
31
G. Statistical Hypothesis
This study aims to find out the dominant type of students' motivation and to
investigate whether or not there is a significant difference in students' grade point
average based on their type of motivation (integrative and instrumental). To
investigate the second research purpose, the writer used an independent samples t-
test. The hypotheses for the independent samples test are formulated as follows:
H0: μ1 = μ2
Ha: μ1 ≠ μ2
1. If p-value > (0.05), the null hypothesis (H0) is accepted and the alternative
hypothesis (Ha) is rejected. It indicates that there is no significant difference in
GPA between the integrative and the instrumental group.
2. If p-value < (0.05), the null hypothesis (H0) is rejected and the alternative
hypothesis (Ha) is accepted. It indicates that there is a significant difference in
GPA between the integrative and the instrumental group.
32
CHAPTER IV
RESULTS AND ANALYSIS
A. Data Description
This study aims to investigate the dominant type of students' motivation in
learning English and to find out whether there is a significant difference in students'
achievement scores based on their type of motivation. In this study, the data were
gathered from the questionnaire filled out by 89 participants. The results of this
study are presented in the form of descriptive and statistical analysis.
The descriptive results describe the students' motivation and their learning
achievement while the statistical analysis investigates the difference in the mean
score of GPAs between students who have integrative motivation and students who
have instrumental motivation in learning English. Both of the descriptive and
statistical analysis results are presented in the following section.
1. Students’ Motivation Score
This section presents the descriptive results of students’ motivation. The
writer analyzes the dominant type of students’ motivation by calculating the mean
score of the integrative motivation items and the instrumental motivation items of
each student. To categorize the type of student’s motivation, the writer adopts the
procedure by Gardner and Lambert which have been explained in the previous
chapter, in which the higher mean score indicates the dominant type of motivation
of each student (See Appendix 6). Furthermore, the results are summarized in the
following table.
Table 4.1
The Frequency and Percentage of Students Based on their Motivation Type
Frequency Percent Valid Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid Integrative 39 43.8 43.8 43.8
Instrumental 50 56.2 56.2 100.0
Total 89 100.0 100.0
33
The data on table 4.1 reveals that there are 39 (43.8%) students who have
integrative motivation while 50 (56.2%) students have instrumental motivation. It
can be seen that the number of students who have instrumental motivation is higher
than those who have integrative motivation. In other words, instrumental
motivation is the dominant type of students’ motivation of batch 2018 in learning
English at the Department of English Education at the Faculty of Educational
Sciences at Syarif Hidayatullah State Islamic University Jakarta.
After the students were categorized based on their motivation types, the
students were grouped into two groups namely the integrative group and the
instrumental group. The integrative group consists of 39 students who have
integrative motivation while the instrumental group consists of 50 students who
have instrumental motivation.
2. Students’ Achievement Scores
In this study, the writer uses students' grade point average as the
achievement scores. To obtain the data, the writer asked the participants' agreement
to inform their GPA, in which they were required to fill out the GPA on the first
part of the questionnaire. The following table presents the descriptive statistics of
the GPA of two groups of students (Integrative and Instrumental Group).
Table 4.2
The Descriptive Statistics of the Students’ GPA of the Integrative Group
Integrative
N Valid 39
Missing 0
Mean 3.2318
Median 3.19
Mode 3.05
Std. Deviation .31641
Variance .100
Minimum 2.61
Maximum 3.84
34
Table 4.2 presents the descriptive statistics of GPA of students in the
integrative group. The data on the table informs that the mean score of the GPA
stands at 3.2318 with a standard deviation of 0.31641. The median and mode of the
data are 3.19 and 3.05 respectively. Furthermore, the lowest GPA achieved by
students in the integrative group is 2.61 while the highest is 3.84. Next, the
descriptive statistics of GPA of students in the instrumental group is presented in
the following table.
Table 4.3
The Descriptive Statistics of the Students’ GPA of the Instrumental Group
Instrumental
N Valid 50
Missing 0
Mean 3.2424
Median 3.235
Mode 2.85a
Std. Deviation .3494
Variance .122
Minimum 2.48
Maximum 3.88
a. Multiple modes exist. The
smallest value is shown
Based on table 4.3, the mean score of the GPA of students in the
instrumental group is 3.2424 with a standard deviation of 0.3494. The median of
the data is 3.235 and the mode is 2.85. Next, the variance of the data is 0.122.
Furthermore, the lowest GPA achieved by students in the instrumental group is 2.48
while the highest is 3.88. Additionally, the frequencies of GPA of students in both
integrative group and instrumental group are illustrated in the following figures.
35
Figure 4.1
The Frequency of Students’ GPA of the Integrative Group
Figure 4.1 presents the frequency of GPA of students who have the
integrative motivation. Based on the figure, there are 4 students who achieved a
GPA between 2.61-2.86. Next, 13 students achieved GPA between 2.86-3.11; 10
students achieved GPA between 3.11-3.36; 5 students achieved GPA between 3.36-
3.6; and 7 students achieved GPA above 3.6.
Figure 4.2
The Frequency of Students’ GPA of the Instrumental Group
36
Based on Figure 4.2, there are 5 students who achieved a GPA between
2.48-2.81. Next, 18 students achieved GPAs between 2.81-3.14; 12 students
achieved GPAs between 3.14-3.47; 6 students achieved GPAs between 3.47-3.6,
and 9 students achieved a GPA above 3.6.
After obtaining the data of students’ GPA, the data was analyzed by using
statistical analysis through SPSS 24 Program. The result of the analysis and its
interpretation is presented in the following section.
B. Data Analysis and Interpretation
In the previous section, it was found out that from the total numbers of 89
participants, there are 50 and 39 students who have instrumental and integrative
motivation respectively. In this section, students are divided into two groups namely
integrative group and instrumental group. The integrative group consists of 39
students who have integrative motivation while the instrumental group consists of
50 students who have instrumental motivation.
Next, the statistical analysis is provided in this part to investigate the
difference of mean score of GPAs between the integrative and the instrumental
group by conducting independent samples t-test. Before conducting the t-test, the
data of both groups need to have a normal distribution and to have homogeneous
variances. Therefore, the writer did the normality and homogeneity tests. The
results of the tests are presented in the following sections.
1. Normality Test
In the previous chapter, it has been explained that normality test is a
requirement for parametric tests. In this study, the writer uses independent samples
test, which is categorized as a parametric test, to analyze the data. Before doing the
independent samples test, it is required to see the normality of the data. The test of
normality used in this study is Kolmogorov-Smirnov test. After the GPA of both
instrumental and integrative groups were obtained, the data was analyzed through
SPSS 24 Program. The result of the normality test is presented in the table following
table.
37
Table 4.4
The Result of the Normality Test
One-Sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov Test
Integrative Instrumental
N 39 50
Normal
Parametersa
,b
Mean 3.2318 3.2424
Std.
Deviation
.31641 .34940
Most
Extreme
Differences
Absolute .104 .077
Positive .104 .077
Negative -.071 -.067
Test Statistic .104 .077
Asymp.
Sig.
(2-tailed)
.200c,d .200c,d
a. Test distribution is Normal.
b. Calculated from data.
c. Lilliefors Significance Correction.
d. This is a lower bound of the true significance.
In the hypotheses of the normality test, the data is claimed as normally
distributed if the significance value is higher than 0.05. Based on table 4.3, the
significance value of the integrative group is 0.200 and the instrumental group is
0.200. Both of the significance values are higher than 0.05 which indicate that the
data has a normal distribution. Moreover, the normality of the data is illustrated in
the two following figures.
38
Figure 4.3
The Normal Distribution Curve of GPA of the Integrative Group
Figure 4.4
The Normal Distribution Curve of GPA of the Instrumental Group
39
Figure 4.3 and 4.4 are the histogram of GPA of the integrative group and
the instrumental group. The histogram is used as a graphical method to see the
frequency distribution of the data. Both of the histograms show normal curves,
which indicate that the data is normally distributed.
2. Homogeneity Test
After doing the normality tests, the next step is to find out the homogeneity
of the variances. To find out the homogeneity, the writer used Levene’s Test
through SPSS Program. The following table presents the result of the homogeneity
test.
Table 4.5
The Result of the Test of Homogeneity of Variances
Levene Statistic df1 df2 Sig.
1.349 1 87 .249
A data is claimed as having homogeneous variances if the significance value
on the Levene’s test is higher than 0.05. Based on Table 4.4, the significance value
of the homogeneity test stands at 0.249 which is higher than 0.05. Therefore, it can
be concluded that the data have homogeneous variances.
3. Independent Samples Test
To investigate the difference in GPA between the integrative group and the
instrumental group, the writer uses independent samples test through the SPSS
program. The following two tables (Table 4.5 and 4.6) present the SPSS output of
the t-test.
Table 4.6
The Group Statistics
Group N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean
GPA Integrative 39 3.2318 .31641 .05067
Instrumental 50 3.2424 .34940 .04941
40
Table 4.5 reveals that the mean score of the GPA of the integrative group is
3.2318 with a standard deviation of 0.31641 and a standard error mean of 0.05067.
Meanwhile, the mean score of the GPA of the instrumental group is 3.2424 with a
standard deviation of 0.34940 and a standard error mean of 0.04941. Next, the
results of the t-test are presented in the table below.
Table 4.7
The Results of the Independent Samples Test
Levene's Test
for Equality of
Variances
t-test for Equality of Means
F Sig. t df
Sig.
(2-
tailed
)
Mean
Difference
Std. Error
Difference
95% Confidence
Interval of the
Difference
Lower Upper
GPA Equal
variances
assumed
1.349 .249 -.148 87 .883 -.01061 .07165 -.15302 .13181
Equal
variances
not
assumed
-.150 85.017 .881 -.01061 .07077 -.15132 .13011
Table 4.5 presents the results of the independent samples test, which
consists of the Levene’s test and t-test. The Levene’s test part provides the
information about the equality of variances with a significance value of 0.249. As
mentioned in the previous section, if the significance value of the Levene’s test is
above 0.05, it means that the variances of the data are equal. Furthermore, since the
variances are equal, the first row (equal variances assumed) is used to interpret the
result of the t-test. The p-value (sig. 2-tailed) for the equal variances is 0.883.
Based on the hypothesis, if p-value > (0.05), the null hypothesis (H0) is
accepted and the alternative hypothesis (Ha) is rejected. The p-value obtained on
the t-test is 0.883 > 0.05. Therefore, the null hypothesis (H0) is accepted. In other
words, there is no significant difference in students' grade point average between
the integrative group and the instrumental group.
41
C. Discussion
In the first chapter, it has been mentioned that the purposes of this study are
to find out the dominant type of students’ motivation in learning English and to
examine the difference in their achievement scores based on their types of
motivation. Based on the results, there are 39 (43.8%) students who have integrative
motivation and 50 (56.2%) students who have instrumental motivation in learning
English. Hence, the result answers the first research question: “What is the dominant
type of motivation which affects students in learning English?” Therefore, it can be
inferred that instrumental motivation is the dominant type of students’ motivation
of batch 2018 in learning English at the Department of English Education, the
Faculty of Educational Sciences, Syarif Hidayatullah State Islamic University
Jakarta.
Furthermore, the writer did the statistical analysis by conducting the
independent samples test to answer the second research question: “Is there a
significant difference in students' GPA based on their type of motivation?” Before
doing the test, the students are divided into two groups based on their dominant type
of motivation. There are 50 students of the instrumental group and 39 students of
the integrative group. The mean score of GPA of the instrumental group stands at
3.2424 while the integrative group is 3.2318. It can be seen that the difference
between the mean scores is only 0.0106. It is also supported by the result of the t-
test calculation which reveals that there is no significant difference in students' GPA
between the instrumental group and the integrative group. The result of the
independent samples test reveals that the p-value was 0.883. It was explained in the
statistical hypotheses that if the p-value obtained is higher than 0.05 (α), the null
hypothesis ( H0 ) is accepted and the alternative hypothesis (Ha ) is rejected.
Therefore, it can be concluded that there is no significant difference in GPA scores
between the instrumental and the integrative group.
42
Concerning motivation types, the result of this study is consistent with the
previous studies conducted by Kitjaroonchai,1 Widesti,2 and Hong and Ganapathy,3
in which instrumental motivation is the main type of students' motivation in
learning English. However, there are several differences in this study compared to
those studies. Firstly, Kitjaroonchai in his study investigates the level of students'
motivation toward the ASEAN community and also analyzes the difference in
learning motivation between students with high academic achievement (GPA
3.20) and those with lower achievement. Meanwhile, the study conducted by Hong
and Ganapathy is qualitative research with a case study design to analyze the
dominant type of students' motivation in learning English in the ESL context.
Furthermore, the result of this study differs from the previous studies
conducted by Nailufar4 and Degang,5 in which their findings reveal that integrative
motivation is the dominant type of students' motivation in learning English. Also,
Nailufar not only investigates the motivation of English language learners but also
the motivation of Arabic language learners. Both groups of students majoring in
English and Arabic indicating a high level of integrative motivation. Moreover,
Degang in his study analyzes the difficulties of learning English encountered by the
students. It was found out that grammatical and writing problems were the most
difficult problem faced by the students. Next, presentation and speaking problems
were considered as the most difficult problem after the grammatical and writing
problems. Meanwhile, reading and listening comprehension were less difficult
problems encountered by the students.
1 Yee Chee Hong & Malini Ganapathy, To Investigate ESL Students’ Instrumental and
Integrative Motivation towards English Language Learning in a Chinese School in Penang: Case
Study, English Language Teaching, 10(9), 2017. 2 Happy Widesti, Motivation in English Language Learning of English Department Fresh
Year Students, Thesis of Satya Wacana Christian University Salatiga, 2016. 3 Nakhon Kitjaroonchai, Motivation toward English language learning of students in
secondary and high schools in education service area office 4, Saraburi Province, Thailand,
International Journal of Language and Linguistic, 1(1), 2012, pp. 22-33 4 Yuyun Nailufar, Analysis of Motivations to Study English and Arabic, ENGLISH
EDUCATION JOURNAL (EEJ), 9(2), 2018, pp. 328-344. 5 Manusak Degang, Motivation Toward English Language Learning of the Second Year
Undergraduate Thai Students Majoring in Business English at an English-Medium University,
Master’s Project of Srinakharinwirot University Bangkok, 2010.
43
In summary, the result of this study reveals that the instrumental motivation
outperformed the integrative motivation of students in learning English. The result
also reveals that there is no significant difference in grade point average between
the group of students who have the integrative motivation and the group of students
with instrumental motivation. This study is also supported by the previous studies
although there are no similar studies that investigate the difference in GPA between
students who have integrative motivation and students who have instrumental
motivation.
44
CHAPTER V
CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION
A. Conclusion
This study concerns students’ motivation in learning English at the
Department of English Education, the Faculty of Educational Sciences, Syarif
Hidayatullah State Islamic University in the academic year 2018/2019. The study
aims to identify the dominant type of students' motivation in learning English and
to investigate the difference in students' achievement scores based on their type of
motivation. In this study, the writer uses the concept of integrative and instrumental
motivation. Integrative motivation refers to the genuine interests of students in
learning a foreign language while instrumental motivation refers to the individual's
reasons for learning a foreign language to achieve specific purposes such as to get
economic advantages.
The research method used in this study is quantitative research procedures
with survey design. This study involves 89 students in the Department of English
Education batch 2018 as the sample. To collect the data, the writer uses a
questionnaire as the instrument. The results of this study reveal that the instrumental
motivation outperformed the integrative motivation, in which 39 (43.8%) students
have integrative motivation while 50 (56.2%) students have instrumental
motivation in learning English.
Moreover, the results also indicate that there is no significant difference in
grade point average between students in the instrumental group and the integrative
group. In the t-test calculation, it was revealed that the p-value obtained is 0.883,
which is higher than 0.05 (α). In the statistical hypothesis, it is explained that if the
p-value obtained is above 0.05, the null hypothesis ( H0 ) is accepted and the
alternative hypothesis (Ha) is rejected. In other words, the GPA of students in the
integrative group and the instrumental group are not significantly different.
In conclusion, instrumental motivation is the dominant type of the
motivation of students of batch 2018 in learning English at the Department of
English Education, the Faculty of Educational Sciences, Syarif Hidayatullah State
45
Islamic University Jakarta. Also, it was found out that there is no significant
difference in grade point average between students who have instrumental
motivation and students who have integrative motivation
B. Suggestion
This study is limited only on the dominant type of students' motivation in
learning English and also the difference in grade point average of students based on
their motivation type. Based on the results, the writer has several recommendations
for teachers or lecturers and also for future researchers.
Firstly, the writer suggests teachers or lecturers to promote students'
motivation to learn English and also to increase students' awareness about their
motivation type as their reasons for learning. Next, the writer suggests future
researchers to not only identify the dominant type of students' motivation but also
to analyze more deeply about the integrative and instrumental motivation of
students in learning English and the implications of both motivation types towards
the learning process and outcome.
46
REFERENCES
Alderman, M Kay. Motivation for Achievement: Possibilities for Teaching and
Learning Second Edition. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.,
2004.
Alizadeh, Mitra. The Impact of Motivation on English Language Learning,
International Journal of Research in English Education. 1(1). 2016.
Altmisdort, Gonca. An Analysis of Language Teacher Education Programs: A
Comparative Study of Turkey and Other European Countries. English
Language Teaching. 9(8). 2016.
Ananda, Rusydi., & Fadhli, Muhammad. Statistik Pendidikan (Teori Dan Praktik
Dalam Pendidikan). Medan: CV. Widya Puspita, 2018.
Anwar, Choiril., & Nugroho, Kurniawan Yudhi. Students’ Motivations toward
Choosing English Education, Indonesian EFL Journal. 4(1). pp. 57-64.
2018.
Bećirović, Senad. The Relationship between Gender, Motivation and Achievement
in Learning English as a Foreign Language. European Journal of
Contemporary Education. 6(2). pp. 210-220. 2017.
Broughton, Geoffrey., et. al. Teaching English as a Foreign Language Second
Edition. Abingdon: Taylor & Francis e-Library, 2003.
Brown, H. Douglas. Principles of Language Learning and Teaching. New York:
Longman, 2000.
Cohen, Louis., Manion, Lawrence., & Morrison, Keith. Research Methods in
Education Sixth Edition. Abingdon: Taylor & Francis e-Library. 2007.
Degang, Manusak. Motivation Toward English Language Learning of the Second
Year Undergraduate Thai Students Majoring in Business English at an
English-Medium University. Master’s Project of Srinakharinwirot
University Bangkok. 2010.
Dörnyei, Zoltan. Conceptualizing Motivation in Foreign-Language Learning.
Language Learning. 40(1). pp. 45-78. 1990.
-------. Motivation and Motivating in the Foreign Language Classroom. The Modern
Language Journal. 8(3). pp. 273-284. 1994.
Dörnyei, Zoltan., & Ushioda, Ema. Teaching and Researching Motivation Second
Edition. Harlow: Pearson Education Limited. 2011.
Gardner, R. C. & Lambert, Wallace E. Attitudes and Motivation in Second-
Language Learning. Rowley: Newbury House Publishers. 1972.
47
Gardner, R. C. Social Psychology and Second Language Learning: The Role of
Attitudes and Motivation. London: Edward Arnold Ltd. 1985.
-------. Integrative Motivation: Past, Present, and Future, Temple University Japan,
Distinguished Lecturer Series, Tokyo, February 17, 2001; Osaka, February
24, 2001, p. 10. retrieved from https://publish.uwo.ca/~gardner/
-------. The Attitude/Motivation Test Battery: Technical Report, Retrieved on March
26, 2019, from https://publish.uwo.ca/~gardner/docs/AMTBmanual.pdf
Garg, Sunil & Gautam, Archana. Learning English can change your life for the
better, International Journal of English Language, Literature and
Humanities. III(2). pp. 560-566. 2015.
Gonzales, Richard DLC. Motivational Orientation in Foreign Language Learning:
The Case of Filipino Foreign Language Learners. TESOL Journal Vol. 3.
pp. 3-28. 2010.
Gottlieb, Margo. Assessing English Language Learners: Bridges to Educational
Equity. Corwin: A SAGE Company. 2016.
Harmer, Jeremy. How to Teach English. Harlow: Pearson Education Limited, 2007.
Hong, Yee Chee & Ganapathy, Malini. To Investigate ESL Students’ Instrumental
and Integrative Motivation towards English Language Learning in a
Chinese School in Penang: Case Study. English Language Teaching. 10(9).
pp. 17-35. 2017.
Jefiza, Adila. Students’ Motivation and Attitudes Toward Learning English in an
English Course. Journal of Language, Literature and Education. XII(12).
2017.
Kitjaroonchai, Nakhon. Motivation toward English language learning of students
in secondary and high schools in education service area office 4, Saraburi
Province, Thailand. International Journal of Language and Linguistic. 1(1).
pp. 22-33. 2012.
Lasagabaster, David., Doiz, Aintzane., & Sierra, Juan M. (Eds). Motivation and
Foreign Language Learning: From theory to practice. Amsterdam: John
Benjamins Publishing Co., 2014.
Liuolienė, Alvyda & Metiūnienė, Regina. Second Language Learning Motivation,
Santalka. Filologija. Edukologija. 14(2). pp. 93-98. 2006.
Masyhur, Influence of Motivation and Language Learning Environment on the
Successful EFL Learning, Proceedings of the Fourth International Seminar
on English Language and Teaching (ISELT-4). pp. 88-104. 2016.
48
Nailufar, Yuyun. Analysis of Motivations to Study English and Arabic. ENGLISH
EDUCATION JOURNAL (EEJ). 9(2). 328-344. 2018.
Reddy, M. Samanth. Importance of English Language in today’s World,
International Journal of Academic Research. Vol.3. Issue-4(2). pp. 179-184.
2016.
Rini, Julia Eka. English in Indonesia: Its position among other languages in
Indonesia. Beyond Words. 2(2). pp. 19-39. 2014.
Ryan, Richard M. & Deci, Edward L. Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivations: Classic
Definitions and New Directions, Contemporary Educational Psychology. pp.
54-67. 2000.
-------. Self-Determination Theory and the Facilitation of Intrinsic Motivation,
Social Development, and Well-Being, American Psychologist. 55(1). pp.
68-78. 2000.
Santrock, John W. Educational Psychology. New York: McGraw-Hill. 2011.
Schunk, Dale H., Pintrich, Paul R & Meece, Judith L. Motivation in Education:
Theory, Research, and Applications third Edition. New Jersey: Pearson
Education. 2008.
Suhana, Cucu. Konsep Strategi Pembelajaran. Bandung: Refika Aditama. 2014.
Torabi, A & Tabrizi, A.R.N. The Relationship between Instrumental, Integrative,
Intrinsic, and Extrinsic Motivations and the Lexical-oriented Knowledge
among Intermediate Iranian EFL Learners. Journal of Applied Linguistics
and Language Research. 3(6). pp. 319-328. 2016
Touré-Tillery, Maferima & Fishbach, Ayelet. How to Measure Motivation: A
Guide for the Experimental Social Psychologist. Social and Personality
Psychology Compass. 8(7). pp. 328-341. 2014.
Ur, Penny. A Course in Language Teaching: Practice and theory. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press. 1991.
Widesti, Happy. Motivation in English Language Learning of English Department
Fresh Year Students, Thesis of Satya Wacana Christian University Salatiga,
2016.
Woolfolk, Anita. Educational Psychology. Harlow: Pearson Education. 2016.
49
APPENDIX I
PRELIMINARY STUDY INTERVIEW
Interview Questions
(Adapted from Mikio Iguchi, Using Interviews to Explore L2 Motivation: Its
Emerging Opportunities
https://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/maebit/20/0/20_41/_pdf/-char/ja )
1. Do you think learning English is important?
2. What motivates you to learn English?
3. Do you have any native speakers to interact with using English?
4. Do you think mastering English will be beneficial for your future?
Interview Results
Date of the Interview: April 16, 2019
Student 1
Question: Do you think learning English is important?
Answer: Yes, because English is an international language and many people use
English to communicate with people from other country, so it
is important to learn English.
Question: What motivates you to learn English?
Answer: I’m motivated to learn English because I like the language and also the
native speakers.
Question: Do you have any native speakers to interact with using English?
Answer: Yes, on the social media.
Question: Do you think mastering English will be beneficial for your future?
Answer: Yes, I think by learning English it will be useful for my future.
50
Student 2
Question: Do you think learning English is important?
Answer: Yes, of course, learning English is very important.
Question: What motivates you to learn English?
Answer: Actually, I’m interested in other knowledge field, but I learn English
because I want to study abroad.
Question: Do you have any native speakers to interact with using English?
Answer: A few
Question: Do you think mastering English will be beneficial for your future?
Answer: Of course, because I want to study abroad, mastering English is very
important to me.
Student 3
Question: Do you think learning English is important?
Answer: Yes, because many people in this era speak English.
Question: What motivates you to learn English?
Answer: I learn English because I really like the language.
Question: Do you have any native speakers to interact with using English?
Answer: Yes, when I was in high school, I had many pen-pals from English
countries
Question: Do you think mastering English will be beneficial for your future?
Answer: Yes, because English is important in this era. So, if I master English, it
will be beneficial for my future.
51
APPENDIX 2
STUDENTS’ MOTIVATION QUESTIONNAIRE
52
53
54
55
56
APPENDIX 3
CONTENT VALIDITY OF THE QUESTIONNAIRE
The main concept addressed in this study is the dominant type of motivation of
college students to learn English as a foreign language. Motivation is an internal
state which leads individuals to accomplish specific goals, which involves both
mental action and physical action. It works as a motive for doing something, which
is usually associated with excitement.
Based on the literature review, there are two motivational constructs in language
learning namely instrumental orientation and integrative orientation.
1) Integrative orientation: students’ intention to learn the target language in order
to communicate with the native speakers and their interest in culture and ways
of life of the target language community.
2) Instrumental orientation: students’ perception of the usefulness of the target
language and their intention to use the language for practical purpose, such as
future studies or career, travelling abroad, or getting financial benefits.
There are several tools that can be used to measure students’ motivation such as
performance tests, questionnaires, free writing, achievement tests, and scales. In
this study, the writer used questionnaire as a tool to find out the dominant type of
motivation had by students in learning English. The questionnaire used five-point
Likert scale ranging from strongly disagree to strongly agree. The following table
presents the specification of the items of the questionnaire.
Orientation Items
Integrative 1. Studying English enables me to be more at ease with English-
speaking people.
2. Studying English enables me to meet and converse with more
and varied people.
3. Studying English is important because it will enable me to
better understand and appreciate the English way of life.
57
7. Studying English is important because I will be able to interact
more easily with speakers of English.
8. Studying English is important for me to learn more about the
culture and art of English native speaker.
9. I learn English so well that it will become natural to me.
13. I have a strong desire to know all aspects of English.
14. I enjoy watching English movies and TV programs.
17. I enjoy reading English magazines, newspapers, and books.
18. I would like to know more native English speakers.
Instrumental 4. Studying English is important because I will need it for my
career.
5. Studying English is important because it will make me more
educated.
6. Studying English is important because it will be useful in
getting a good job.
10. Studying English is important because other people will
respect me more if I am proficient in English.
11. Studying English is important to me because English
proficiency is necessary for promotion in the future.
12. Studying English is important because with a high level of
English proficiency I will be able to make a lot of money.
15. Studying English can be important to me because I think I’ll
need it for further studies.
16. I study English in order to keep updated and informed of
recent news of the world.
19. Studying English is important to me because I am planning
to study abroad.
20. Studying English is important for travelling abroad.
58
APPENDIX 4
THE VALIDITY OF THE QUESTIONNAIRE ITEMS
Item
Number r-count r-table Category
1 0.451 0.361 Valid
2 0.652 0.361 Valid
3 0.518 0.361 Valid
4 0.574 0.361 Valid
5 0.759 0.361 Valid
6 0.481 0.361 Valid
7 0.702 0.361 Valid
8 0.601 0.361 Valid
9 0.791 0.361 Valid
10 0.679 0.361 Valid
11 0.713 0.361 Valid
12 0.685 0.361 Valid
13 0.736 0.361 Valid
14 0.741 0.361 Valid
15 0.699 0.361 Valid
16 0.804 0.361 Valid
17 0.603 0.361 Valid
18 0.673 0.361 Valid
19 0.663 0.361 Valid
20 0.494 0.361 Valid
59
APPENDIX 5
TABLE R
60
APPENDIX 6
STUDENTS’ MOTIVATION SCORES
Subject
Mean
Score of
Integrative
Items
Mean Score
of
Instrumental
Items
Level of
Integrative
Motivation
Level of
Instrumental
Motivation
Category
1 5 4.4 Highest High Integrative
2 4.8 4.4 Highest High Integrative
3 4 4.8 High Highest Instrumental
4 4.3 4.9 High Highest Instrumental
5 4.9 4.2 Highest High Integrative
6 3.5 4.6 High Highest Instrumental
7 3.6 4.3 High Highest Instrumental
8 4.5 3.9 Highest High Integrative
9 4.2 4.8 High Highest Instrumental
10 4.1 4.5 High Highest Instrumental
11 3.8 3.2 High Moderate Integrative
12 3.7 4.7 High Highest Instrumental
13 4 4.5 High Highest Instrumental
14 3.4 3.5 Moderate High Instrumental
15 3.8 4.9 High Highest Instrumental
16 3.4 4.3 Moderate High Instrumental
17 3.9 4.5 High Highest Instrumental
18 4.4 4.8 High Highest Instrumental
19 4.1 3.3 High Moderate Integrative
20 3 3.7 Moderate High Instrumental
21 4.9 3.9 Highest High Integrative
22 3.3 4.1 Moderate High Instrumental
23 3.4 4.1 Moderate High Instrumental
24 3.8 4.5 High Highest Instrumental
25 3.7 4.5 High Highest Instrumental
57 4.7 4.2 Highest High Integrative
26 4.5 3.7 Highest High Integrative
27 3.3 4.4 Moderate High Instrumental
28 4.4 3.4 High Moderate Integrative
29 4.6 4.3 Highest High Integrative
61
Subject
Mean
Score of
Integrative
Items
Mean Score
of
Instrumental
Items
Level of
Integrative
Motivation
Level of
Instrumental
Motivation
Category
30 3.7 4.7 High Highest Instrumental
31 4.1 4.5 High Highest Instrumental
32 4.6 3.8 Highest High Integrative
33 3.4 4.2 Moderate High Instrumental
34 4 3.4 High Moderate Integrative
35 4.5 3.9 Highest High Integrative
36 3.4 4.1 Moderate High Instrumental
37 4.7 4.1 Highest High Integrative
38 4.3 3.4 High Moderate Integrative
39 3.7 4.6 High Highest Instrumental
40 3.5 3.1 High Moderate Integrative
41 4.1 4.7 High Highest Instrumental
42 4.1 4.5 High Highest Instrumental
43 4.6 4 Highest High Integrative
44 4.6 3.5 Highest High Integrative
45 4.4 4.5 High Highest Instrumental
46 3.7 4.7 High Highest Instrumental
47 4.2 5 High Highest Instrumental
48 4.2 3.3 High Moderate Integrative
49 4.3 4.7 High Highest Instrumental
50 4.2 3.3 High Moderate Integrative
51 4.5 4 Highest High Integrative
52 3.8 4.2 Moderate High Instrumental
53 4.7 3.7 Highest High Integrative
54 4.5 3.4 Highest Moderate Integrative
55 3.2 3.9 Moderate High Instrumental
56 4.6 3.9 Highest High Integrative
58 4 4.5 High Highest Instrumental
59 4.3 3.4 High Moderate Integrative
60 4.5 4.1 Highest High Integrative
61 4.3 4.6 High Highest Instrumental
62 4.7 4.2 Highest High Integrative
63 3.7 3.3 High Moderate Integrative
64 3.6 4.6 High Highest Instrumental
65 4.2 3.4 High Moderate Integrative
66 3.3 4 Moderate High Instrumental
62
Subject
Mean
Score of
Integrative
Items
Mean Score
of
Instrumental
Items
Level of
Integrative
Motivation
Level of
Instrumental
Motivation
Category
67 4.4 4.7 High Highest Instrumental
68 3.4 3.8 Moderate High Instrumental
69 4.5 3.8 Highest High Integrative
70 4 3.2 High Moderate Integrative
71 4.4 4.8 High Highest Instrumental
72 3.3 3.9 Moderate High Instrumental
73 3.9 3.3 High Moderate Integrative
74 3.6 4.5 High Highest Instrumental
75 4.5 4.3 Highest High Integrative
76 3.6 4.6 High Highest Instrumental
77 4.7 3.8 Highest High Integrative
78 3.3 3.6 Moderate High Instrumental
79 4.6 4 Highest High Integrative
80 3.9 3.2 High Moderate Integrative
81 3.6 3.4 High Moderate Integrative
82 3.9 4.5 High Highest Instrumental
83 4.2 4.5 High Highest Instrumental
84 3.7 4.5 High Highest Instrumental
85 4.2 4.7 High Highest Instrumental
86 3.9 4.6 High Highest Instrumental
87 4.8 4 Highest High Integrative
88 4.3 4.5 High Highest Instrumental
89 3.4 4.2 Moderate High Instrumental
63
APPENDIX 7
SURAT BIMBINGAN SKRIPSI
64
APPENDIX 7
SURAT BIMBINGAN SKRIPSI
65
APPENDIX 8
SURAT IZIN PENELITIAN
66
APPENDIX 9
REFERENCE EXAMINATION PAPER
67
68
69
70
71
