Bachelor Thesis
Motivation as a Mediator of the Relationship between L2 Exposure and L2 Achievement
Silke Vereeken 10523693 Bachelorthesis begeleider: Nihayra Leona Klinische Ontwikkelingspsychologie Universiteit van Amsterdam Totaal aantal woorden Abstract: 166 Totaal woorden thesis: 5819
Abstract
The main focus of this study is the relationship between exposure to an L2 (English) and achievement in it. Furthermore, it investigates motivation to learn the L2 as a possible mediator for that relationship. To do so, a total of 69 secondary school students from secondary school grades 7 and 8 self-reported their exposure to English, filled in a
motivational questionnaire based on Gardner’s AMTB to assess their motivational degree, and completed a total of four achievement assessment tests; two vocabulary tests (the EIBO-Vocabulary and PPVT) and two spelling tests (EIBO-Spelling and WRAT). A significant relationship between exposure and achievement was found on only one test (PPVT). Furthermore, motivation to learn English only had a significant effect on one test (EIBO-Spelling). Important to note is that exposure to English highly affected motivation to learn it on all four tests. This suggests that there is a connection between exposure to English and motivation to learn it, and supports the theory of the mere-exposure effect applied to language-learning.
How often do you wish you could learn a foreign language? And not just learn it, but also be able to communicate in it with locals, speaking almost effortlessly and understanding it well? Every person learning a new language will tell you how hard it can be to become proficient enough in it to easily do so. When motivated to learn a new language, you often expose yourself to it by studying its grammar and vocabulary. But what exactly the
relationship between exposure to a language when learning it and the motivation behind it is, has not yet been studied. Research implies that exposure to a second language (L2) has a positive effect on achievement in it. Motivation to learn the L2 seems to also have a positive effect on achievement. But a combination of these two models has not yet been researched, which begs the question: How does motivation affect exposure to an L2 and achievement in it?
Because of the internet and globalization, learning new languages efficiently has become more important than it was the previous century. English is a lingua franca, the global language of business and trade (Seidlhofer, 2005), which makes it an important language to learn. Showing high achievements in English, an L2 of the Netherlands, from an early age can be a promising asset for future professionals, as it is the language most commonly used by scientists, linguists, and businesspeople all over the world. Finding underlying principles that aid and encourage L2 achievement can help improve the way an L2 is taught and learned in schools, and can make it easier for children to learn said language. The subject of English in Dutch schools could become more substantial by the year 2032: A proposed new legislation wants every school, starting with kindergarten, to incorporate the subject of English as a core-subject by then (Platvorm Onderwijs 2032, 2016). This means that English would be taught from a very young age, putting it on the same level of importance as learning Dutch, reading and arithmetics.
Higher exposure to English as an L2 could possibly lead to higher achievement in English because of implicit internalization of grammar and vocabulary (Ivády, 2007). The more you know of a language (grammar, vocabulary, colloquialism), the higher you would score on standard school achievement tests for it. In the Netherlands, one is often exposed to English. For example, English TV shows that are not animated or primarily broadcast for children are not audio-dubbed. The shows are instead broadcast with Dutch subtitles. As soon as you turn on the TV, exposure to different English accents and pronunciations,
colloquialisms, and broad exposure to the language’s vocabulary and grammar is almost guaranteed. This could explain the nationwide proficiency Dutch people show for the English language, and which Dutch people are renowned for amongst native English speakers. This prevails in the English Proficiency Index (EPI), which ranks the Netherlands second out of 70 countries around the world (EPI, 2015) in English proficiency. The high exposure rate to the English language might be why the Dutch show great proficiency in it.
Reading subtitles for the majority of TV shows can become tiresome and annoying. When it’s hard to follow what is happening or what people are saying, it can be frustrating for the viewer. This frustration at not understanding well might lead to an increase in the viewer’s motivation to comprehend what is being said without needing to read the subtitles, thereby increasing motivation to learn the language. The same idea could be applied to someone taking an interest in English music: By being exposed to the language in a song and not understanding the lyrics, motivation to understand them might grow. This way one might improve their language skills by improving their listening comprehension, reading skills and vocabulary. This hypothesis of a mediated relationship between exposure and achievement by motivation could also be applied to the concept of social media, which secondary school students are very interested in (Strasburger, et al., 2013).
Youths nowadays use social media as an easy-access tool of self-finding, and most of them take it very seriously (Ahn, 2011; Ushioda, 2011). With social media platforms being
accessible from all over the world, its’ leading language is most often English. Youths using social media are therefore exposed to the English language, and might gain knowledge of the language that way in an effort to keep up with their virtual friends. But could the relationship between these kinds of exposure to the language and the achievement in it be solemnly explained by the amount of exposure? Or could the motivation to understand their favourite TV shows or music, and to keep up with social media influence achievement? None of this has been taken into account when researching the relationship between exposure to an L2 and achievement in it. Neither has the possibility of mediation by motivation in said relationship. To investigate the relationship between exposure, motivation and achievement in an L2 further, it is beneficial to take scientific studies and published theories into account.
According to a research paper by Palermo, Mikulski, Faber, Hanish, Martin & Stagel (2012), pre-school children who were exposed to English at home and in pre-school with peers seemed to score higher on English achievement than those who were not. Palermo and his colleagues suggest that while in-school exposure could not be linked to higher
achievement for young children, studies with older children might show such a relationship. Bedore, Pena, Griffin & Hixon (2012) have paid close attention to the effects of Age of Exposure to English (AoEE) on English achievement of 1st and 3rd graders with bilingual English/Spanish upbringing. They found that the more often a child is exposed to English as an L2 at a young age, the higher the achievement will be in it as they become more proficient in it. Further support for these results is given by a study by Fitzgerald, Stenner, Sanford-Moore, Koons, Bowen & Kim (2015). They questioned whether the amount of years of English exposure interacts with English reading ability. They found that English reading ability was related to years of exposure to the English language both within and outside of the classroom. Gamez (2015) also researched classroom-based English exposure in relation to Spanish speakers’ attempts at learning the English language. He found that frequent exposure to high-quality classroom-based English is positively related to achievement.
These researchers have acquired their data through observations in classrooms. Their primary focus has been on exposure to the English language at school. But exposure to an L2 in a school setting is quite constant for all students in the same class, while exposure outside of school is not. Another factor that varies between students is motivation to learn, as is achievement. The relationship between these three factors would be interesting to research.
The relationship between motivation and achievement has been put into theories by for example Gardner (1985). Gardner proposes that differing L2-learning-motivation can affect achievement, and motivation could be affected by identification with English natives and interest in English-language-culture or cultural products. He specifically stresses the
importance of the effects of the learner’s social context and social interactions on motivation to learn an L2. Dörnyei (2005) disagrees with the importance of this factor. He proposed a different model from Gardner’s that lists linguistic self-confidence as the most important factor in motivation to learn an L2. Using Dörnyei’s model as a set of factors to compare with, Kormos and Csizér (2008) studied the relationship between L2 (English) learning and motivation. They found support for both theories in their research. Kormos and Csizér were able to link identification with English-speaking natives and interest in English language culture with motivation to learn. Those who showed high identification with and interest in the English language gained higher achievements in it. This supports Gardner’s model. Regarding Dörnyei’s model, they were able to link linguistic self-confidence, in the form of ideal-self aspirations after learning the language, to motivation. From Kormos and Csizér’s results, one can infer that interest in and identification with a linguistic culture and its
products could come from exposure to said culture and/or products. This would provide a link between motivation and exposure, exposure and achievement, and motivation and
achievement in L2 learning.
A further study on possible factors in motivation for L2 learning was done by Watanabe (2012). In her dissertational paper, Watanabe investigates changes in Japanese
students’ English learning motivation and achievement in English. She found three
motivational constructs which significantly influenced achievement: English learning attitude, desire to learn the language (which can be categorized as intrinsic motivation), and motivation intensity. This supports the motivational theory made by Gardner, who lists all three factors as influential for motivating students to learn a foreign language (Gardner, 1985/2004). She was also able to identify factors that influenced motivation, one of them being exposure to the language. Exposure to the language could happen in the form of for example siblings, media use, or home life. Watanabe’s findings offer a starting point to research the relationship between exposure to an L2, motivation to learn it, and achievement in it. But no study researching this model of relationship has yet been published. This study can therefore be seen as a pilot-study regarding the relationship between exposure, motivation, and L2-achievement.
While the aforementioned studies have researched the relationship between exposure to an L2 and achievement in it, more research is necessary to establish possible mediating factors for this relationship. While many papers researched and concluded a positive effect of motivation for and achievement in an L2 (mostly English), nothing can be said about a mediated relation between exposure and achievement through motivation. Neither has there been any research about whether exposure to an L2 could influence one’s motivation to learn an L2 and only thereby increase achievement in the L2. With this study we hope to change that.
Although there is no published social psychology theory regarding the triangular-relationship of exposure to the L2, motivation to learn it and achievement in it, a theory published by Zajonc (2001) could offer an explanation for it: The mere-exposure effect, also sometimes known as the familiarity effect. This theory states that people gain increased liking to something the more they come into contact with it. Research about whether this theory could be applied to L2 learning has not yet been done, but the theory might be applicable to
language-learning. High amounts of exposure to an L2 could increase liking for it, which could in turn motivate an individual to learn the L2 more efficiently and thoroughly.
Therefore, motivation to learn the language could mediate the relationship between exposure to it and achievement in it.
While school exposure to an L2 is constant, home exposure is not the same for every student. An older sibling already learning the language at school and repeating words and phrases they learned before a younger siblings has the opportunity to learn it in school themselves can also increase the exposure to the language for an individual. In their spare time, students can expose themselves to a foreign language as much as they like, which leads to variation in exposure between students. Motivation to learn an L2 is another factor that varies between students. This study is the first to focus on the relation between exposure to an L2 at home and motivation to learn it.
The aim of this study is to research the relationship between exposure and
achievement in an L2 (English), and to investigate whether this relationship is mediated by motivation to learn English. To do this we will gather information from English language learners in secondary education. They will complete a motivational questionnaire, an exposure questionnaire to ascertain the amount of individual exposure to English, and four separate English achievement tests measuring English vocabulary and English spelling. Besides expecting a direct relationship between L2-exposure and L2-achievement, we also expect L2-motivation to be a significant mediator of the relationship between exposure to and achievement in an L2 (English). We therefore expect a relationship between L2-exposure and L2-motivation, as well as a relationship between L2-motivation and L2-achievement. This study takes into account the participants’ exposure to the English language in their
home/personal lives and how often they make use of their English language skills. This will be done by asking the participants to fill in questions about the amount of time they have
learned, spoken and been exposed to the English language so far, and in what way they have been exposed to it.
Methods Participants
We recruited 87 (N = 69, 34 of which were female) secondary school students between the ages of 11 and 14 for this research (m = 12.08 years, SD = 4.05 years). Their native
language was Dutch, and they were in their 7th or 8th year of secondary school by European standards. The participants were recruited by contacting their school with information regarding the aim of the study. There were no exclusion criteria based on social status, background or heritage, or otherwise.
Measures
The questionnaires and tasks were completed on a laptop provided by the participants’ school. The responses were recorded using Qualtrics.
Demographic Questionnaire: To ascertain the participants’ age and gender, we asked them to fill in a demographic questionnaire asking their date of birth, gender, and country they were born in.
English Exposure: This questionnaire inquired about the participant’s direct exposure to the English language by quantifying the amount of English spoken by their parents, at their home, within their family and friend-group(s), in the form of homework and via (social) media. It held a total of 41 questions. “I chat online in English” is an example of the kind of questions that were posed. 20 of the 41 questions could be answered on a 5-point scale from “never” to “always”, and were coded accordingly, with “never” being coded 1 point and “always” being coded 5 points. The responses to the other 21 questions, which asked about the languages participants spoke at home, were coded into a point-system. A point was given
for every answer that alluded to English exposure, such as a parent with English as their mother tongue, or English being spoken at home. Per older sibling the participant got another point added to their total score for exposure. The amount of years a participant had been learning/speaking English at school was coded into corresponding points and added to the total value of exposure. To counteract the one-sidedness of the exposure measurement, two questions about Dutch media usage were also included. The added value of these two questions was subtracted from the total score of all previous questions from this
questionnaire. By that, a total value for exposure to the English language was calculated. “Engels in het Basisonderwijs” (EIBO) - Spelling: This spelling test was constructed using words from a list of English vocabulary that all students in the Dutch educational system should know at the beginning of secondary school. To ascertain the participant’s English spelling ability, they were asked to listen to an English spoken, pre-recorded sentence in a classical setting. The sentence was shown on their screens apart from one missing word, which they had to spell. The participants were encouraged to fill in a word even if they were unsure of the spelling or correctness of their listening. Before the tasks began, they were given two trial sentences to practice on. An example of the phrases used are “Yesterday the ______ was late.”, with the missing word being “bus”, and “He likes scrambled _____.”, with the missing word being “eggs”. The total amount of tasks for the EIBO-spelling test was 60, which each correct answer being coded 1 point. A total value of all correct answers was calculated for each participant and resulted in a total score for the EIBO-Spelling test.
“Engels in het Basisonderwijs” (EIBO) – Vocabulary: To ascertain the participant’s English vocabulary skills, participants were given the EIBO vocabulary test version A. This vocabulary test was constructed using words from the list of English vocabulary that all students in the Dutch educational system should know at the beginning of secondary school. This list is known as the “Engels in het Basisonderwijs”-list and contains grade-specific sets of words for each year English is a subject in Dutch schools. In this questionnaire, the
participants were given a carrier sentence, i.e. “The village is small. Village is: …”. They were then asked to pick the Dutch translation of the bolded word out of three options. The participants were required to answer every question, even when uncertain as to what to answer. The total number of tasks for the EIBO-vocabulary test amounted to 50 multiple choice questions. A total value of all correct answers was calculated for each participant and resulted in a total score for the EIBO-Vocabulary test.
Wide Range Achievement Test 4 (WRAT 4): To measure the participants’ ability to read and spell English words as well as comprehend sentences written in English, the subtest “Spelling” of the WRAT 4 created by Wilkinson and Robertson (2006) was administered. The participants were given a sentence to listen to, i.e. “On…It is on the table…On” and were asked to spell the repeated and stressed word, underlined in this example. They were given the level Blue version which is validated for children aged 12 through adults aged 94. The test shows a reliability of Cronbach’s α .97. This suggests an overall excellent reliability of the WRAT. Because of the non-native English speaking participants, the total amount of tasks for this test was 30 tasks. A total value of all correct answers was calculated for each participant and resulted in a total score for the WRAT 4.
Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test, Fourth Edition (PPVT 4): To measure the receptive vocabulary English skills, the PPVT 4 created by Dunn and Dunn (1959) was administered. Sets 1 through 10 was used, with items like “kiwi” and “boy”, amounting to 120 items. The participants were presented with a series of pictures, with four numbered pictures to a page/task, and hear a pre-recorded word describing one of the pictures. The participant then had to select the picture of the word they just heard. The PPVT 4 shows high internal consistency reliability of .94 and test-retest reliability of .93. A total value of all correct answers was calculated for each participant and resulted in a total score for the PPVT 4.
Motivational Questionnaire: This questionnaire was based on the ‘Attentional and Motivational Testing Battery’ (AMTB) created by R.C. Gardner (2004). Adding questions in regards to Dörnyei’s theory, this questionnaire was created by Nihayra Leona (MSc). The participants were presented with a number of questions to answer on a scale from “strongly disagree” to “strongly agree”, making up a 7-point scale. After being shown a sample item to practice with, i.e. “I prefer foreign languages (like French and German) to doing maths”, the participants were given a total of 140 questions to answer. These were split into two halves and administered separately on two different testing days. The questions could be categorized into 15 different subscales (“interest in foreign languages”, “parental encouragement”,
“motivational intensity”, “English class anxiety”, “English teacher evaluation”, “Attitudes toward learning English”, “Attitudes toward English-speaking people”, “integrative
orientation”, “desire to learn English”, “English course evaluation”, “English use anxiety”, “Instrumental orientation”, “Ought-to L2 self”, “Ideal L2 self”, and “linguistic
self-confidence”). The scores on these subscales were valued according to their position on the 7-point scale, and added up to a total score, with the scores for “English class anxiety” and “English use anxiety” being subtracted from the total to make up a complete Motivation score used for analyses.
Procedure
This research has been approved by the Ethics Department of the University of
Amsterdam. By use of passive consent, the participants were free to decline participation. The questionnaires and tasks were administered during two 60-minute sessions to 86 participants on two separate days in the participants’ classroom-environment. The motivational
questionnaire was split in two and administered separately on two research days. On day one, during the first 60-minutes-session, we administered the demographic questionnaire, the first half of the motivational questionnaire and the EIBO vocabulary and EIBO spelling tasks. On
day two, during the second 60-minutes-session, we administered the second half of the motivational questionnaire, a spelling test (WRAT4) and a vocabulary test (PPV4). Upon completion of the questionnaires and tasks, the participants individually received a small reward for their participation in the form of sweets.
Data Analyses
The collected data were checked on gender and grade for differences in levels regarding the dependent variable achievement. Grade was checked for normality because students in a higher grade may have a broader range of vocabulary. To determine this, an ANOVA was used with grade as the independent factor and achievement on all four tests as the dependent variable. Gender was checked by using an independent-samples t-test with gender as the independent variable and achievement as the dependent variable. Next, the effect of exposure on achievement was analysed. To determine whether or not motivation is actually a mediator, the PROCESS function for SPSS made by Andrew F. Hayes was used. Setting exposure as the independent variable, motivation as the mediator variable, and achievement as the dependent variable, and using model 4 as analyses model, results of the regression analyses were computed. All usual assumptions apply.
Results
Because of missing data results from 19 participants were excluded from the analyses. These include 9 for missing exposure questionnaire data, 6 for incomplete response on the WRAT, and 4 for incomplete PPVT responses. These exclusions resulted in a total number of 69 participants (34 females) from two different grades (7th and 8th grade in secondary school by European standards). Table 1 shows the mean scores and standard deviations (SD) for each test per class.
Klas Exposure Motivation EIBO-Spelling EIBO-Vocabulary PPVT WRAT VWO1+ Mean 90,3810 334,9048 51,4762 47,2857 91,5238 14,5714 Std. Deviation 22,11442 59,03635 5,23086 2,43193 16,11713 3,76260 HAVO2 Mean 83,4286 266,7619 49,3333 46,9048 93,9524 14,1905 Std. Deviation 23,14427 52,96782 7,67680 1,72930 15,80657 4,09413 VWO2+ Mean 76,8519 314,8519 52,8519 48,1852 100,1481 15,6667 Std. Deviation 17,70855 58,23276 5,47514 1,79823 8,48394 3,78255
The first stage of the analyses consisted of checking the data for extreme values. Plots were made and inspected for extreme values, but no significantly extreme values were found. There were no differences resulting from gender on either of the four tests for achievement. Grade was tested as an independent variable against all four achievement tests, using an ANOVA. For this analyses an assumption was violated: Levene’s test indicated unequal variances (F= 4.877, p= .011) for the PPVT, so the Welch-correction was used as a robust test of equality of means for this test. The results of the ANOVA and the Welch-correction
showed that grade did not significantly influence the score of any participant on any
achievement test. We can therefore conclude that neither gender nor grade had any effect on the achievement of these participants on any achievement test. Each of the main analyses will be discussed one-by-one.
The EIBO-Spelling test: There was an insignificant effect of exposure on achievement on the EIBO-Spelling test, b= -.005, t= -.131, p=.896 (path ‘c’ on Figure 1). With an R² = .016, we can assume that 1.6% of the variance within achievement on the EIBO-Spelling test can be explained by exposure to the English language. The negative value of the coefficient b indicates that the higher the exposure, the lower the achievement. Exposure to the L2 seemed to have a significant effect on Motivation, b= 1.49, t= 4.82, p< .001 (path ‘a’ on Figure 1). When taking a look at the indirect effect of motivation, it seemed to significantly predict achievement, b= .034, t= 2.48, p= .016 (path ‘b’ on Figure 1). Taking into account the effect of motivation in the model, the direct effect of exposure on achievement remained
insignificant, b= -.055, t= -1.373, p= .174, R²= .085 (path ‘c’‘ on Figure 1). The R² of .085 allows the assumption that 8.5% of the variance within achievement on the EIBO-Spelling test can be explained by this model of mediation. The negative exposure coefficient suggests that the higher exposure is, the lower the achievement would be even with motivation as a mediator. As suggested by these results, Motivation seems to influence achievement on the EIBO-Spelling, b= -.005, 95% Bca CI [.012, .120]. We can therefore conclude that exposure to the English language does not affect achievement on the EIBO-Spelling test, whilst Motivation does. Figure 1 shows a graphical display of these results.
The EIBO-Vocabulary test: The analyses shows an insignificant effect of exposure on achievement on the EIBO-Vocabulary test, b= .006, t= .539, p= .592 (path ‘c’ on Figure 2). It also reported an R²= .004, implying that 0.4% of the variance within achievement can be explained by the amount of exposure to the English language experienced. Exposure to the L2 seemed to have a significant effect on Motivation, b= 1.49, t= 4.82, p< .001 (path ‘a’ on Figure 2). Further analyses showed an insignificant mediation/indirect effect of motivation on achievement, b= .009, t= 1.947, p= .056 (path ‘b’ on Figure 2). With motivation in the model
of regression, exposure did not have a significant effect on achievement, b= -.007, t=-0.514, p= .609 (path ‘c’‘ on Figure 2). The R² of .058 indicates that 5.8% of the variance in
achievement can be explained by this model. We can therefore conclude that exposure to the English language does not affect achievement on the EIBO-Vocabulary test. Figure 2 offers a graphical depiction of these results.
The PPVT: The analyses of the data collected on the PPVT shows a significant effect of exposure on achievement on the PPVT test, b= .19, t= 2.496, p= .015 (path ‘c’ on Figure 3). R²= .085 for this test, meaning that 8.5% of the variance in achievement can be accounted for by exposure to the English language experienced. Exposure to the L2 seemed to have a significant effect on Motivation, b= 1.49, t= 4.82, p< .001 (path ‘a’ on Figure 3). Further analyses showed that motivation to learn English was not significant for achievement on this test, b= .041, t= 1.383, p= .171 (path ‘b’ on Figure 3). In conclusion, no indirect effect of motivation on achievement was found. Furthermore, when taking the effect of motivation to learn into the equation, exposure seemed to not have a direct effect on achievement, b= .128, t= 1.464, p= .148 (path ‘c’’ on Figure 3). This implies that, while motivation to learn English is not a mediator for it, exposure seems to have a direct effect on achievement on the PPVT.
For this analyses of mediation, R²= .085, meaning that 8.5% of the variation in achievement can be explained by this model of regression. We can therefore conclude that exposure to the English language affects achievement on the PPVT test in a direct effect, and that this
relationship is not mediated by motivation to learn English. Figure 3 offers a graphical display of these results.
The WRAT: There was no significant effect of exposure to the English language on achievement on the WRAT, b= .036, t= 1.665, p=.101 (path ‘c’ on Figure 4). The R² = .040, meaning that 4% of the variance within achievement can be explained by variance in
exposure. Exposure to the L2 seemed to have a significant effect on Motivation, b= 1.49, t= 4.82, p< .001 (path ‘a’ on Figure 4). There was no indirect effect of exposure on achievement through motivation to learn, b= .012, t= 1.736, p= .173 (path ‘b’ on Figure 4). There was also no direct effect of exposure on achievement when motivation was included, b= .019, t= .746, p= .458 (path ‘c’’ on Figure 4). The R²= .0679 implies that 6.79% of the variance within achievement can be explained by this model of regression, with motivation to learn as a mediator. Figure 4 displays these results graphically. We can therefore conclude that exposure to the English language does not affect achievement on the WRAT.
Discussion
The main objective of this study was to investigate the relationship between exposure to the English language and achievement in said language. The main findings of this study suggest that exposure to the English language does not have an effect on achievement
concerning English vocabulary and spelling. Exposure to the English language seemed to only partially have an effect on English vocabulary achievement. Motivation to learn English had no effect on that relationship. Furthermore, motivation to learn English had a partial effect on spelling achievement. Exposure did not have an effect on achievement on that relationship. Most significantly, exposure to English seemed to affect overall motivation to learn it. We therefore conclude that exposure to the L2 as measured in this study did not affect
achievement in the L2, that motivation to learn the L2 did not mediate said relationship, and that exposure to the L2 affects motivation to learn it.
The findings of this study are surprisingly different from those of prior studies (Gamez, 2015; Palermo et al, 2012; Fitzgerald et al, 2015; Kim, 2009; Bedore et al, 2012). The findings of this study do not support the findings of said studies, because the previously
mentioned studies all found a significant effect of exposure to an L2 on achievement in it, whereas this study overall did not. This study also does not offer empirical support for the hypothesis stated earlier that motivation to learn the language mediates the effect of exposure to the language on achievement (Kormos & Csizer, 2008; Watanabe, 2011; Zajonc, 2001), because this study did not find overall significant mediation effects of motivation to learn the L2 on the relationship of exposure to the L2 and achievement in it.
This study is first in connecting motivation to learn an L2 with exposure to it, and the relationship between exposure to, motivation to learn and achievement in the L2. Our
hypothesis was that because of social psychology theories like the mere-exposure effect by Zajonc (2001), increased exposure to an L2 would have a positive effect on achievement in it, because the relationship would be mediated by motivation to learn the L2. The findings of this study show no effect of a mediation by motivation to learn the L2 in said relationship.
Therefore, these findings do not support the hypothesis of a relation between exposure to an L2 and achievement in it being mediated by motivation to learn it. However, these findings do offer empirical support for the hypothesis that increased exposure to an L2 increases
individual motivation to learn the L2. This study shows that exposure highly affects
motivation to learn English. This suggests that the more a person is exposed to English as an L2, the more they are motivated to learn it. The mere-exposure effect therefore could to be applicable in increasing motivation when learning English. In conclusion, this study has produced supportive evidence that the mere-exposure effect by Zajonc (2001) could be applied to L2 learning.
This study is also the first study to measure exposure to the L2 in the way it did: Exposure was measured in a subjective way, with questionnaires filled in by the students themselves. Earlier studies (Bedore et al, 2012; Gamez, 2015) made use of objective
in school, while this study did not. By asking students to self-report their experiences in the form of questions and a questionnaire, this study made use of a subjective method of quantification. The researchers who used observative methods to measure exposure found significant effects in the relationship of exposure and achievement, whilst this study, using subjective methods, did not. A possible explanation for this could be the kinds of exposure that were measured: This study measured extra-curricular amount of exposure to English, while previously mentioned studies (e.g. Bedore et al, 2012; Games, 2015) concentrated their measurements of exposure to the L2 on curricular activities. The findings of this study are not in line with earlier research, and it cannot offer support for the effect of exposure to an L2 and achievement in it. This could instead show support for a difference between the effects of curricular exposure to an L2 on achievement in it and the effect of extra-curricular exposure to the L2 and achievement in it. While curricular exposure to the L2 may influence
achievement in it, extra-curricular exposure to the language may be a different factor of exposure to the L2 that does not influence achievement in it at all. What exactly that
relationship and cause of this difference in effects between means of exposure are, would be interesting to investigate in future research studies. This study could act as a pilot-study for future research regarding the differing effects of different kinds of exposure to an L2 on achievement in it.
The results of this study are useful for teachers and educators in the field of teaching English as a foreign language (TEFL). TEFL’ers can work on getting their students to increase their extra-curricular exposure rate to English, which would increase the students’ motivation to learn the language. Because of the varied ways in which a person can be exposed to a language, TEFL’ers can pick whatever method they prefer to expose their students to the English language and educate them on it. When choosing something like an English TV show or English music that can spike a student’s interest, the student may choose to expose him- of herself to it in their spare time. This would increase their motivation to learn the language.
Highly motivated students are usually more pleasant to have in class and work with than unmotivated students. An improved classroom-environment from motivated students could therefore increase job-satisfaction in TEFL’ers, as it reduces stress and frustrations from working against students when they are not motivated to learn. Motivating students to learn is a building block for a better future, and is therefore a good focus point.
In sum, it seems plausible that learning a foreign language is not easy. However, learning English and becoming proficient in it is very important in this day and age. English is not only a lingua franca, but was proposed to become part of the basic educational system in the Netherlands by 2032 (Platvorm Onderwijs, 2016). The findings of this study suggests that exposure to the English language highly affects an individual’s motivation to learn and possibly aspire to master it. Exposing oneself to the various aspects of the English language using TV, social media, music and/or books could increase motivation to become proficient in it. These findings could be important for teachers and students of foreign languages to aid their endeavours of learning a new way to communicate with more people globally.
References
Ahn, J. (2011). The effect of social network sites on adolescents' social and academic
development: Current theories and controversies. Journal of the American Society for information Science and Technology, 62(8), 1435-1445.
Bedore, L. M., Pena, E. D., Griffin, Z. M., & Hixon, J. G. (2016). Effects of Age of English Exposure, Current Input/Output, and grade on bilingual language
performance. Journal of child language, 43(3), 687-706.
Cohen, J. (1988), Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences, 2nd Edition. Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Dörnyei, Z. (2005). The psychology of the language learner: Individual differences in second language acquisition. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Dörnyei, Z. (2009) The psychology of second language acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press
English Proficiency Index (2015). Retrieved from http://www.ef.nl/epi/
Fitzgerald, J., Stenner, A. J., Sanford-Moore, E. E., Koons, H., Bowen, K., & Kim, K. H. (2015). The Relationship of Korean Students’ Age and Years of English-as-a-Foreign-Language Exposure with English-Reading Ability: A Cross-Age Study. Reading Psychology, 36(2), 173-202.
Gámez, P. B. (2015). Classroom-based English exposure and English Language Learners’ expressive language skills. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 31, 135-146.
Gardner, R. C. (1985). Social psychology and second language learning: The role of attitudes and motivation. London: Edward Arnold.
Gardner, R. (2007). Motivation and Second Language Acquisition 1. PORTA LINGUARUM, 8, 9-20.
Ivady, R. E. (2007). Implicit learning and second language acquisition. Periodicals of implicit cognition, 1, 1-8.
Kim, T. Y. (2009). The dynamics of L2 self and L2 learning motivation: A qualitative case study of Korean ESL students. English Teaching, 65(3).
Kraemer, H. C., Morgan, G. A., Leech, N. L., Gliner, J. A., Vaske, J. J., & Harmon, R. J. (2003). Measures of clinical significance. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 42(12), 1524-1529.
Kormos, J., & Csizér, K. (2008). Age‐related differences in the motivation of learning English as a foreign language: Attitudes, selves, and motivated learning behavior. Language Learning, 58(2), 327-355.
Palermo, F., Mikulski, A. M., Fabes, R. A., Hanish, L. D., Martin, C. L., & Stargel, L. E. (2014). English exposure in the home and classroom: Predictions to Spanish-speaking preschoolers’ English vocabulary skills. Applied Psycholinguistics, 35(06), 1163-1187.
Platform Onderwijs 2032 (2016). Ons onderwijs2032: eindadvies. Den Haag: Platform Onderwijs2032.
Seidlhofer, B. (2005). English as a lingua franca. ELT journal, 59(4), 339.
Strasburger, V. C., Hogan, M. J., Mulligan, D. A., Ameenuddin, N., Christakis, D. A., Cross, C., Fagbuyi, D.B., Hill, D.L., Levine, A.E., McCarthy, C. & Moreno, M. A. (2013). Children, adolescents, and the media. Pediatrics, 132(5), 958-961.
Ushioda, E. (2011). Language learning motivation, self and identity: Current theoretical perspectives. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 24(3), 199-210.
Vygotsky, L. (1978). Interaction between learning and development. Readings on the development of children, 23(3), 34-41.
Watanabe, M. (2011). Motivation, self-determination, and willingness to communicate by English learners at a Japanese high school. TEMPLE UNIVERSITY.
Zajonc, R. B. (2001). Mere exposure: A gateway to the subliminal. Current directions in psychological science, 10(6), 224-228.
