CAN THO UNIVERSITY
SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
ENGLISH EDUCATION DEPARTMENT

AN INVESTIGATION INTO CTU NON-MAJORED
ENGLISH STUDENTS’
MOTIVATION AND METACOGNITIVE
STRATEGY USE
B.A. Thesis
Field of study: English Language Learning

Supervisor: Nguyễn Thị Văn Sử, M.Ed

Student: Lê Thị Bích Thùy
Code: 7075907
Class: English Education-2-C33

Cần Thơ, April 2011

1


ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I must begin my thanking to the English Department who has given me
opportunities to do this research and guidance.
For specific contribution to my paper, I would like to show my deep gratitude
to my supervisor, Ms. Nguyễn Thị Văn Sử, who has spent much time giving me
valuable instructions and corrections on my thesis. It is not my success without her
amicable encouragement.
I am also grateful to my friends for helping and giving much encouragement to
finish this thesis.

In addition, my deep appreciation goes to all the students who provided me
valuable information. Without their cooperation, my thesis would never have been
completed.
Finally, I extremely would like to express my special thanks to my parents and
my boyfriend who were always by my side and gave me spiritual advice during the
time of work.
Lê Thị Bích Thùy

i


ABSTRACT
Motivation and metacognitive strategies are considered as two key factors in
learning English (Oxford, 1989; Biggs, 1995). This descriptive study was done to find
out (1) motivation, (2) the use of metacognitive strategies and (3) the relationship
between motivation and the use of metacognitive strategies by 110 non- majoreded
English students at Can Tho University. The instrument used in the study was a 4Likert scale questionnaire on motivation and metacognitive strategies, which were
adapted from those by Vallerand et al. (1992), and Schraw, G. & Dennison, R.S.,
(1994). The results of this study revealed that students are highly motivated to learn
English. They are more extrinsically motivated (M= 2.96) than intrinsically motivated
(M= 2.70). In addition, it was found that metacognitive strategies are highly used.
Among the three metacognitive strategies, monitoring strategies was used the most
frequently (M= 2.96). Besides that, a relatively significant correlation between
extrinsic motivation and metacognitive strategies was found (r= 0.47, r= 0.32, r= 0.30.
Based on the results, discussions and implications for teaching English at CTU are
suggested.

ii



TÓM TẮT
Động lực học và chiến thuật siêu nhận thức được xem như là hai nhân tố chủ
chốt trong việc học tiếng Anh (Oxford, 1989; Biggs, 1995). Nghiên cứu mô tả này
được thực hiện nhằm tìm ra (1) động lực học, (2) chiến thuật siêu nhận thức và (3)
mối quan hệ giữa động lực học và việc sử dụng chiến thuật siêu nhận thức của 110
sinh viên không chuyên Anh văn tại Đại học Cần Thơ. Công cụ được sử dụng trong
nghiên cứu này là bảng khảo sát 4- Likert Scale về động lực học và chiến thuật siêu
nhận thức dựa trên bảng khảo sát của Vallerand (1992) và Schraw, G. & Dennison,
R.S (1994). Kết quả nghiên cứu cho thấy sinh viên có động lực học tiếng Anh cao.
Những sinh viên này có động lực học “thực dụng” hơn là học vì “sở thích”. Bên cạnh
đó, chiến thuật siêu nhận thức cũng được sử dụng trong khi học. Trong ba chiến thuật
siêu nhận thức, chiến thuật “điều chỉnh” việc học được sử dụng thường xuyên nhất.
Ngoài ra, nghiên cứu cũng cho thấy động lực học “thực dụng” và chiến thuật siêu
nhận thức có mối quan hệ tương đối chặt chẽ. Dựa trên kết quả tìm được, nghiên cứu
này đưa ra một số thảo luận và ứng dụng cho việc dạy tiếng Anh ở Đại học Cần Thơ.

iii


CONTENTS
Acknowledgements .....................................................................................Page i
Abstract.............................................................................................................. ii
Tóm tắt.............................................................................................................. iii
Contents ............................................................................................................ iv
List of table and figures..................................................................................... vi
Chapter 1: INTRODUCTION......................................................................... 1
1.1 Rationale ...................................................................................................... 1
1.2 Research aims and questions ........................................................................ 2
1.3 Definition of terms ....................................................................................... 3
1.4 Significance of the research.......................................................................... 3

1.5 Research organization .................................................................................. 3
Chapter 2: LITERATURE REVIEW ............................................................ 5
2.1 Motivation in second language acquisition ................................................... 5
2.1.1 Definition of motivation.................................................................. 5
2.1.2 Self Determination Theory.............................................................. 6
2.2 Metacognitive strategies in English learning................................................. 7
2.2.1 Definition of metacognition ............................................................ 7
2.2.2 Categorization of metacognition ..................................................... 8
2.2.3 The role of metacognition in learning process ................................. 9
2.3 The relationship between motivation and metacognitive strategies ............. 10
2.3.1 The role of motivation and metacognition in learning achievement10
2.3.2 Some studies related to the relationship between motivation and learning
strategies ............................................................................................... 11
2.4 Justifications of the present study ............................................................... 12
Chapter 3: METHODOLOGY...................................................................... 13
3.1 Design ........................................................................................................ 13
3.2 Participants and setting .............................................................................. 13
3.3 Instrument .................................................................................................. 13
3.4 Procedures.................................................................................................. 15
3.4.1 Piloting the study.......................................................................... 15
3.4.2 The official study.......................................................................... 15
3.5 Data analysis .............................................................................................. 16
Chapter 4: RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS ................................................ 17

iv


4.1. Normal distribution of data........................................................................ 17
4.2 Descriptive statistic of students’ motivation ............................................... 18
4.3 Descriptive statistics of students’ metacognitive strategies use .................. 20

4.4 The correlation between students’ motivation and metacognitive strategies
use……………………………………………………………………………….22
4.4.1 The correlation between extrinsic motivation and metacognition
strategies………………………………………………………………………...23
4.4.2 The correlation between intrinsic motivation and metacognition
strategies………………………………………………………………………...23
Chapter 5: CONCLUSIONS, IMPLICATIONS, LIMITATIONS, AND
FURTHER RESEARCH DIRECTIONS...................................................... 25
5.1 Conclusions ............................................................................................... 25
5.2 Implications................................................................................................ 26
5.3 Limitations and Future research directions ................................................. 26
5.3.1 Limitations ................................................................................... 26
5.3.2 Future research directions ............................................................. 27
REFERENCES ............................................................................................... viii
APPENDICES .................................................................................................. xi
Appendix 1............................................................................................. xi
Appendix 2......................................................................................... xviii

v


LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES
Table 3.1: Taxonomy of the questionnaire items
Table 4.1: Descriptive statistics of students’ motivation and metacognitive strategies
Table 4.2: Descriptive statistics of students’ motivation
Table 4.3: Descriptive statistics of students’ metacognitive strategies use
Figure 2.1: Metacognitive strategies in learning process
Figure 4.1: Statistics of students’ motivation
Figure 4.2: Statistics of students’ metacognitive strategies use


vi


CTU non-majored English students’ motivation and metacognitive strategy use

Chapter 1
INTRODUCTION
Motivation has been widely accepted by both teachers and researchers as one of the
key factors that influences the success of foreign language learning. According to Oxford
(1989), effective learning strategies also affect learning outcome. Among learning strategies,
Kuhn (2000) said that metacognitive strategies play important role in enhancing learning
performance. Studies have been conducted on majored English students’ motivation and the
use of metacognition in some specific skills. How are non-majored English students who are
believed to have low proficiency in English and low motivation as well? Whether do they
know how to use metacognitive strategies when studying English? This question will be
addressed in this research. In the first chapter- Introduction, an over view of the research will
be presented. This chapter will address (1) the rationale of this research, (2) the research aims
and questions, (3) definition of terms, (4) significance of the study and (5) the research
organization.

1.1. Rationale
With the development of research on psycholinguistics and foreign language
teaching, more attention has been paid to the learners’ characteristics. The reason is
because language learners differ in many ways and they can be affected by many
social and psychological factors. Researchers have identified many individual learning
variables influencing learning outcome. Among the individual learning variables,
language learning motivation and language learning strategies are considered two
key factors that affect the study of second language learning (Oxford, 1989).
Motivation encourages students to make efforts to learn a language well in order to
succedd or reach the goals they propose in their learning (Keller, 1983). Among

different learning strategies, metacognitive strategies was regarded one of the most
important language learning strategies by several researchers (O’Malley, Chamot,
Stewner-Manzares, Kupper & Russo, 1985; Oxford, 1990; Skehan, 1989). Vermunt
(1987) confirmed that metacognition was also said to be related to learning outcomes.
According to Biggs (1995), motivation and metacognitive strategies are related
to academic achievement. Most of the studies were conducted to examine motivation
and metacognitive strategies among majored English students in some specific skills
in English as a Foreign Language (EFL) environment. Researchers investigated the
7


CTU non-majored English students’ motivation and metacognitive strategy use

relationship between motivation, metacognitive strategies and listening, writing or
reading performance. It was found that there was a significant relationship between
metacognitive strategy use and learning performance, as well as metacognitive
strategy use and intrinsic, extrinsic motivation (Corno, et al., 1982; Harrison, 1991;
Kurtz & Borkowski, 1984; Pintrich, 1990). Nevertheless, there were few studies
conducted for non-majored English students who just learn English integrated skills
and do not have high English proficiency. Thus, motivation and metacognitive
strategies use can be different. As a result, motivation and metacognitve strategies as
well as their relationship of non-majored English students need to be researched.
In Can Tho University (CTU) context, the number of non-majored English
students is more than the number of majored English students. They also learn English
as a foreign language. They have to take an English placement test, after that they are
placed to attend General English courses. In these courses, they study English skills
intergratively. Whether non-majored English students in CTU are motivated and use
metacognitive strategies like students in other EFL contexts? In addition, to what
extent is motivation and metacognitive strategies in learning English of non-majored
English students? To find out the answer for these questions, a research on motivation

and metacognitive strategies was conducted at CTU.

1.2. Research aims and questions
The aims of this study are:
(1) to examine non-majored English students’ motivation in learning English at
Can Tho University (according to Self- Determination Theory discussed in
chapter 2)
(2) to find out the extend to which students use metacognitive strategies in learning
English at CTU
(3) to investigate the relationship between types of motivation and the use of
metacognitive strategies in language learning process
The study addresses the three following research questions:
1. Are non-majored English students intrinsically or extrinsically motivated?
2. To what extent do non-majored English students use metacognitive strategies in
their English classrooms?

8


CTU non-majored English students’ motivation and metacognitive strategy use

3. To what extent is non-majored English students’ motivation related to
metacognitive strategies?
1.3. Definition of terms
This part will give the definition of some terms closely related to the study.
“Motivation” is considered as the choices people make to what experiences or goals
they will approach or avoid, and the degree of effort they will exert in that respect
(Keller, 1983).
“Extrinsic motivation” is the motivational tendency that drives people to pursue an
activity because of some instrumental ends that are external to the activity (Deci and

Ryan, 1985).
“Intrinsic motivation” motivates people to engage in activities because of the
inherent pleasure and satisfaction when people do these activities (Deci and Ryan,
1985).
“Metacognition” is “cognition about cognition” or “thinking about thinking”
(Anderson, 2002a).
These terms will be presented clearly in chapter 2- Literature review.
1.4 Significance of the study
The findings of this study may be useful for the teachers at CTU in developing
English textbooks or teaching materials that sustain students’ motivation. English
teachers can know their students’ motivation, metacognitive strategies, and the
relationship between students’ motivation and their learning strategies metacognitve
strategies in order to play an active role to enhance students’ performances. In
addition, students will be offered practical opportunities to be taught how to learn
more effectively by using learning strategies. Thus, it is hoped that this study may
help teachers become more aware of their learners’ motivation for language learning
and teach their students some strategies they can employ to improve their learning.
1.5 Research organization
This thesis is divided into five chapters.
Chapter 1- Introduction serves the introduction to the backgrounds such as the
rationale, three primary objectives of the study with three research questions,
definition of terms, significance of the research and the research organization.
9


CTU non-majored English students’ motivation and metacognitive strategy use

Chapter 2- Literature Review outlines some definitions of motivation and
metacognition. It summarizes some previous studies, which examined the relationship
between motivation and learning strategies.

Chapter 3- Methodology describes the research design, participants and setting,
instrument, procedure, and the data analysis.
Chapter 4- Results and Discussions presents the results of the study and discusses the
research findings.
Finally, chapter 5- Conclusion, Implications, Limitations, and Recommendations
concludes the study with the limitation of the study, the conclusion, and topics for
further research.

10


CTU non-majored English students’ motivation and metacognitive strategy use

Chapter 2
LITERATURE REVIEW
The importance of motivation and metacognition in learning English were mentioned
in past studies (Garner & Lambert, 1972; Oxford & Ehrman, 1995; Biggs, 1995). This
chapter provides a review of the literature that includes (1) a brief overview of the definition
and types of motivation, (2) the definition, and categorization of metacognition and (3) the
correlation between students’ motivation and their metacognitive strategies in some past
studies.

2.1 Motivation in second language acquisition
2.1.1 Definition of motivation:
Motivation is a significant role influencing the extent of people’s desire to do
an activity. Two well- known educational psychologists initiated the notion of
motivation: Robert Gardner and Wallace Lambert in 1950s. According to Garner
(2006), motivation is a very complex concept with many aspects. Thus, it is
impossible to give a specific definition. Motivation can be viewed in many different
ways of thought. Brown (1994) stated that motivation was examined as a factor of

different clusters of attitudes.
Similarly, Ellis (1997) believed that motivation involves the attitudes and
affective elements that influence the degree of the effort that learners make to reach
the goal in learning second language. In other word, motivation plays a key role to the
degree of success in language learning.
Furthermore, Keller (1983) mentioned not only degree of effort but also
choices in considering motivation. He said, “Motivation refers to the choices people
make as to what experiences or goals they will approach or avoid, and the degree of
effort they will exert in this respect.” Therefore, Keller pointed out learners decide not
only the goal they reach but also those they avoid and the degree of the effort to do as
well.
In “Attitudes and Motivation in second language learning”, Gardner and
Lambert believed the learner’s attitudes and readiness determined his motivation for
language study. Besides that, the learner’s orientation to the whole process of learning
11


CTU non-majored English students’ motivation and metacognitive strategy use

a foreign language also indicated motivation to exert the effort for reaching learning
goal (Garner and Lambert, 1972). In their findings, they also distinguished between
integrative motivation and instrumental motivation. This model has been widely
accepted in social contexts and language learning area, but Gardner focused so much
on the integrative motivation. Thus, this model has currently being broadened,
incorporating new concepts from psychology, and learning theory (Crookes &
Schmidt, 1991; Dorney, 2001).
Dorney (2005) referred motivation as an abstract, hypothetical concept, which
people use to explain why they think and behave when they do an activity. He
outlined the distinction between integrative and instrumental motivation as proposed
by Gardner. He also expanded the model of motivation by putting more

concentrations on instrumental motivation.
Oxford & Shearin (1996) asserted that motivation directly influences how often
learners use second language learning strategies, how much learners communicate
with other speakers, how much they acquire the target language, how well they do on
curriculum-related achievement tests, how high their general proficiency levels are
and how long they remember and maintain L2 skills after language study is over.
2.1.2 Self- Determination Theory
Self Determination Theory (SDT) researchers have proposed one alternative
construct of motivation that has useful implications to educational contexts: Deci and
Ryan (1985). In this theory, researchers focused on not only the investigation of
human beings’ inherent tendencies but also the psychological needs that were
considered as the basic factors self-motivation and integration in personality (Ryan &
Deci, 2000). They have proposed a motivational categorization based on the extent of
self-determination. According to SDT, motivation is subdivided into intrinsic versus
extrinsic motivation depending on the degree to which an individual’s behavior is selfmotivated and self-determined (Deci & Ryan, 2002). They also suggested that this
distinction is particularly useful for understanding individual differences in
educational performances in language learning. Particularly, they said that the two
subtypes of motivation are not opposite; however, they are a continuum. Extrinsic
motivation can be defined as the goal of the activity providing satisfaction. It means
that a person is motivated to do something for fun, challenge or his interest. While,
12


CTU non-majored English students’ motivation and metacognitive strategy use

intrinsic motivation relates to the satisfaction within the activity itself. An activity can
be done to lead to a separable outcome.
Despite of different look at motivation and its construct, it was considered that
motivation is a kind consisting of the individual’s attitudes and his desire to make
effort for reaching the goal in language learning. Although there are many ways to

categorize it, the categorization of motivation in SDT framework have applied in
many domains such as education, organization, psychotherapy, etc. By focusing on
the fundamental psychological tendencies toward intrinsic and extrinsic motivation,
SDT occupies a unique position in psychology, as it addresses not only the central
questions about the learners’ motives and goal in learning, but also the costs and
benefits of various ways of socially regulating or promoting behavior.
2.2 Metacognitive strategies in English learning
2.2.1 Definition of metacognition
Metacognitive strategies are considered the most essential ones among
language learning strategies in improving learners’ skill (Anderson, 1991). First, it is
important to explain and categorize language-learning strategies first. Oxford (1990)
stated that learning strategies are specific actions, which the learner uses to make
learning process easier, faster, more enjoyable, more self-directed, more effective, and
more transferable to new learning situations. Moreover, they can be categorized under
three main groups: (1) cognitive strategies, (2) metacognitive strategies, (3) socioaffective strategies (O'Malley et al., 1985).
Metacognition was considered as cognition about cognition; which refers to
second order cognitions: thoughts about thoughts or reflections about actions.
Gradually, the concept of metacognition has been broadened and included not only
thoughts about thoughts and cognitive states, but also psychological factors: affective
states, motives, intentions and the ability to consciously monitor and regulate one’s
knowledge (Livingston, J. A., 1996).
J. H. Flavell (1976) indicated that metacognition involves the active monitoring
and consequent regulation and orchestration of these processes to achieve the goal.
Metacognition reveals the active control over the process of thinking in learning

13


CTU non-majored English students’ motivation and metacognitive strategy use


situations. In the link with this definition, when learners repeat use of metacognition,
it might become automatized process.
Glenberg (2005) also agreed that metacognition or metacognitive knowledge is
related to the knowledge of the mental processes that influence the choices of different
kinds of learning. Metacognition has two fundamental aspects: knowledge about
cognition and self-directed thinking. Self-directed thinking consists of three strategies:
evaluation, planning, and regulation activities.
2.2.2 Categorization of metacognition
Anderson (2002a) simply defined metacognitive strategies as the processes of
“thinking about thinking” or “knowing about knowing” In his model, metacognitive
strategies consist five main elements that are: (1) preparing and planning, (2) selecting
and using particular strategies, (3) monitoring strategy use, (4) learning how to
orchestrate various strategies, and (5) evaluating strategy use. In the preparing and
planning, students start thinking about what their goals are and how they will go about
accomplishing them. In the process of selecting when to use particular strategies,
learners think and make conscious decisions about the learning process and choose the
best and most appropriate strategy in a given situation. In the monitoring strategy use,
through examining and monitoring the use of learning strategies, students have to ask
themselves periodically whether they are still using those strategies as intended. While
learning how to orchestrate various strategies, students combine and make
associations among the various strategies available. In the last component, evaluating
effectiveness strategy use, students try to evaluate whether what they are doing is
effective by self-questioning, debriefing discussions after strategies practice and
checklists of strategies used. This help students reflect through the whole cycle of
learning. At this stage of metacognition, all the previous stages are evaluated.
However, according to Vandergrift (1997), there are four elements that make
up metacognitive strategies: (1) planning, (2) monitoring, (3) evaluation, and (4)
problem identification. In his model, the problem identification category was
emphasized the importance of explicitly identifying the aspects of the task that lead to
the good completion of the task. Besides, he also introduced some simple and helpful

teaching techniques to improve students’ metacognitive strategy use by illustrating
some learning activities.
14


CTU non-majored English students’ motivation and metacognitive strategy use

According to O’Malley and Chamot (1990), metacognitive strategies are
presented by three following metacognitive strategies: a) planning, b) monitoring and
c) evaluating strategies. This model is the most influential and is widely used in the
research of metacognition (O’Malley and Chamot, 1990; Pintrich et al.’s, 1991).
Figure 2.1: Metacognitive strategies in learning process

Metacognitive strategies

Learning process

Planning of own
learning

Monitoring of
own learning

Evaluating of
own learning

According to figure 2.1, there are three components of learning processes in
metacognitive strategies such as planning, monitoring, and evaluation in Learning
English as second language. Based on these elements, learners may approach learning
in a systematic and efficient way. Therefore, metacognitive strategies involve for

example, planning for learning on reading and writing, monitoring of own progress in
reading and writing task or self-evaluating performances of learning after the language
task.
2.2.3 The role of metacognition in learning process
Students use metacognitive strategies in learning, which allows them to plan,
control, and evaluate their learning. Thus, metacognition can play the most central
role in improvement of learning process (Graham, 1997). It means that the use of
appropriate learning strategies in general and metacognitive ones in specific is related
to academic achievement and learning performances’ development (Jacobs & Paris,
1987; Vermunt, 1987; Wittrock, 1983). Anderson asserted that without metacognitive
approaches, language learners have no right direction or ability to monitor their
progress, achievements, and future learning plans. On the other hand, the more
15


CTU non-majored English students’ motivation and metacognitive strategy use

learners are aware of their thinking processes when learning, the more autonomous
they are to master their accomplishments. Similarly, it was emphasized that
"Enhancing metacognitive awareness of what one believes and how one knows and
metastrategic

control

in

application

of


the

strategies

that

process

new

information..."(Kuhn, 2000). It can be concluded that learners’ metacognitive
awareness is related to effective learning in all learning contexts. Therefore, it is very
necessary for teachers to help learners use this awareness to enhance better learning
outcomes.
2.3 The relationship between motivation and metacognitive strategies
2.3.1 The role of motivation and metacognition in learning achievement
Many factors including cognitive and affective ones influence the use of
language learning strategies. Oxford (1989) pointed out that motivation is an affective
variable, which affects the use of language learning strategies. This was supportive of
Gardner’s (1985) finding that the effort of learners to make on language learning is
determined by their attitudes and motivation. Motivation (Deci & Ryan, 1985) and
metacognition (Vermunt, 1987) are both said to be related to academic achievement,
little is known about how much of the relationship between metacognition is
attributable to motivation.
Researchers have done some studies on the relationship between language
learning motivation and language learning strategy use (Maclntyre and Noels, 1996;
Schmidt, Boraie, and Kassabgy, 1996; Schmidt and Watanabe, 2001). The results
pointed out that motivation is significantly correlated with learning strategies. In other
word, learners’ choices of learning strategies may be reflected by their motivation.
Learning strategies, especially metacognitive strategies requiring great effort are

proved to have more relationship with learners’ development of self-autonomy.
A view of the above literature may conclude that it is necessary for teachers to
understand learners’ motivation and their learning strategies in general, their
metacognitive strategies in specific in learning process, since motivation is an
affective factor of learners’ psychology and learning strategies are essential parts of
successful learning. Based on knowing the relationship between language learning
motivation and the use of language learning strategies, teachers can provide materials,

16


CTU non-majored English students’ motivation and metacognitive strategy use

strategies or teaching methods that are suitable for language learners. Consequently,
they can help their learners to reach the goal.
2.3.2 Some research related to the relationship between motivation and
learning strategies
Motivation and metacognition are regarded as two important factors
influencing learners’ performance. Research have shown a great interest in motivation
and metacogniton and determined their correlation.
In EFL context, Samsiah Bidin et al. (2009) and Hsin-Hui Chang (2005)
conducted the studies for non-majored English students to investigate students’
motivation toward learning English. They found that the respondents were more
extrinsically motivated than intrinsically motivated in learning English. It means that
most students learned English for external reasons instead of internal reasons. It could
be inferred that these students just studied English required by the university or they
want to get English certificates for getting job.
Mohd Sahandri Gani Hamzah and Saifuddin Kumar Abdullah (2009) conducted
a study about metacognitve strategies use in East Coast region of Peninsular Malaysia
in Malaysia. It is said that English learners utilized more of the metacognitive strategies

in learning. Furthermore, Sasan Baleghizadeh and Amir Hossein Rahimi (2011)
investigated the relationship between motivation, metacognitive strategies, and listening
performance in Iran. A statistically significant correlation was found between
metacognitive strategy use and listening performance, listening performance and
intrinsic motivation, as well as metacognitive strategy use and intrinsic, extrinsic
motivation.
In English as a Second Language (ESL) context, some studies on the
relationship between motivation and metacognitive strategies were done. Oxford and
Ehrman (1995) investigated the relationship between language learning strategies and
factors such as motivation, self-efficacy, tolerance of ambiguity, and anxiety. They
found a significant correlation between learning strategies and motivation. It was also
recognized that the use of metacognitive strategies was positively correlated with
intrinsic motivation. Therefore, it was said that teachers should pay more attention to

17


CTU non-majored English students’ motivation and metacognitive strategy use

the motivation that could promote and intensify language learning according to
students' concrete situation.
Biggs (1995) proved that intrinsic motivation was an important element of the
relationship

between

metacognitive

approaches


to

learning

and

academic

achievement. Other researchers (Corno, et al., 1982; Harrison, 1991; Kurtz &
Borkowski, 1984; Pintrich, 1990) confirmed that locus of control and self-efficacy
account for some of the relationship between metacognition and academic
achievement. The positive relationship between metacognition and academic success,
then, may be partially attributable to motivation, locus of control, and self-efficacy.
2.4 Justifications of the present study
Researchers in the past did studies on metacognition, they mainly focused on
the use of metacognition on specific English skills such as: listening, reading or
writing of majored English students (Oxford and Ehrman, 1995; Biggs, 1995).
However, non-majored English students study General English courses, which do not
consist of specific skills. I only found a few of research for majored English students,
not for non-majored English students.
In addition, Flavell (1979) considered metacognition as knowledge that
regulates any part of cognitive activity. Motivation is an affective factor that is
directly related to self- regulation of learners in learning process. Thus, I wonder that
there is any relationship between motivation and the extent of using metacognition of
non-majored English students.
Therefore, I conduct this study to find out the correlation between learning
motivation including extrinsic versus intrinsic motivation and three categories of
metacognitive strategies: planning, monitoring, and evaluating in second language
learning among non-majored English students at CTU. As a result, language teaching
methods and materials for English learning will be suitably designed for learners’

learning purposes to make good results in language learning.

18


CTU non-majored English students’ motivation and metacognitive strategy use

Chapter 3
METHODOLOGY
The previous chapter has reviewed the literature related to motivation and
metacognitive strategies and the studies on their relationship. In this chapter, the
methodology of the research that includes (1) the research design, (2) the participants and
setting, (3) the research instrument, (4) the procedure of the research, and (5) the data
analysis will be described.

3.1 Design
This descriptive study is conducted to find out students’ motivation and their
metacognnitive strategies use and investigate how students’ motivation is related to
metacognitive strategies. According to Herbert and Elana (1989), descriptive research
is used to establish the existence of phenomena by explicitly describing them. To
achieve this objective, a questionnaire was delivered to non-majored English students
at CTU. In this type of research, using multiple-choice questionnaire would help “give
a fuller picture and address many different aspects of phenomena” (Silverman, 2000,
p.50).
3.2 Participants and setting
The participants of this study are non-majored English students at CTU. The
total number of students is 110 consisting of 40 males and 70 females ranging in age
from 19 to 22 years. The students’ majors include finance, engineering, biology
education, physics education, construction engineering, geography education,
mechanics, accounting, and economics.

Most of non-majored English students have studied English in their high
schools for seven years and some for three years. At CTU, they are first and second
year students who have been studying General English courses. They have been
learned integratively English skills in their General English courses. Therefore, they
are not believed to have good English proficiency.
3.3 Instrument
Motivation and metacognitive strategies are unobservable; the only way to
assess students’ motivation and their learning strategies is based on means of self19


CTU non-majored English students’ motivation and metacognitive strategy use

report. To get the data, a questionnaire was used as the instrument of this study. The
questionnaire items were developed based on Academic Motivation Scale (Vallerand
et al., 1992) and Metacognitive Awareness Inventory (Schraw, G. & Dennison, R.S.,
1994). Questionnaire items were written in English language and translated into
Vietnamese by the researcher. Then the Vietnamese version was checked by two
English teachers to ensure the Vietnamese version that is easy for General English
students to understand.
There are two sections in the questionnaire: (1) personal data, (2) students’
motivational levels (intrinsic or extrinsic motivation), and their learning strategies.
The first section is about respondents’ personal information such as gender, age,
majored and course. The second section consists of two parts: (1) reasons for learning
English and (2) metacognitive strategies in learning process. The first part states 18
reasons for learning English in two categorizes: 7 items for intrinsic motivation and 11
items for extrinsic motivation. In addition, the second part consists of 15 statements
about metacognitive strategies (3 statements for planning, 3 statements for monitoring,
and 3 statements for evaluating). In the Questionnaire, the students have to indicate
the degree to which they agree with each statement according to a 4-point Likert scale
ranging from 1 to 4:


1: strongly disagree
2: disagree
3: agree
4: strongly agree

Table 3.1: Taxonomy of the questionnaire items
Clusters
Motivation

Metacognitive

Items

Intrinsic motivation

1, 3 , 6, 7, 9, 13, 16

Extrinsic motivation

2, 4, 5, 8, 10, 11, 12, 14, 15, 17,18,

Planning

21, 22, 26, 27 , 30

Monitoring

20, 23, 25, 28, 33


Evaluating

19, 24, 29, 31, 32

strategies

20


CTU non-majored English students’ motivation and metacognitive strategy use

3.4 Procedures
The data collection was carried out during 3weeks from 14 th, March to 3rd,
April 2011. Before the administration of the study, a pilot study was conducted.
3.4.1 Piloting the study
Prior to the official of the questionnaire, the questionnaire was piloted with 31
non-majored English students. The aim of the pilot was to check word formation in
both English version and Vietnamese version and the reliability of the questionnaire
and the separate items in the questionnaire.
Before the piloting process, two English teachers checked the Vietnamese
version and made corrections to make the questionnaire easier to read for General
English students. As a result, the questionnaire was revised to replace certain unclear
terms or vocabularies. For example, item 19 was changed from “Tôi đánh giá lại các
kết quả để cải thiện chúng.” into “Sau khi khóa học kết thúc, tôi đánh giá lại các kết
quả để cải thiện.”
In the pilot phase, the researcher administrated the Vietnamese version of
questionnaire following these steps: (1) delivering the Vietnamese questionnaire, (2)
guiding students to fill their personal information and the questionnaire, (3) explaining
unclear items for the students, and (4) collecting the questionnaire completed. Since
there were no questions from the students, it can be concluded that the Questionnaire

is very easy and clear for General English students to complete.
Data from the pilot was then used to measure the questionnaire reliability using
Statistical Package for the Social science s (SPSS version 16). According to Kline
(1999), the general accepted value of reliability, alpha is from 0.7 for cognitive tests.
It was found that the overall reliability coefficient of this questionnaire was relatively
high (  = 0.84) and the reliability coefficients of each cluster are the reliability of
extrinsic cluster  = 0.82, the reliability of intrinsic cluster  = 0.83, the reliability of
extrinsic cluster  = 0.84; thus reflecting a good reliability of instrument. Therefore,
the questionnaire was used to collect data in the empirical research.

21


CTU non-majored English students’ motivation and metacognitive strategy use

3.4.2 The official study
After piloting, the reliability coefficient was accepted (  = 0.84), the data
collection was then officially administered in three groups of General English
students. Before delivering the questionnaire, the researcher contacted with the
teachers of three groups for permission.
In the official phase, the number of students participating is 110 non-majored
English students. They were informed of the objectives and purpose of the study.
They were also emphasized that there was no right or wrong answers and that they
should state their true and honest responses on each item. The questionnaire was
delivered to students, they were asked to give their personal information. The
researcher gave detailed instructions and explanations about how to fill out the
questionnaire. After that, the questionnaire was collected upon completion; students
were requested to check their responses for incompleteness or missing answers.
Data was subjected to Statistical Package for the Social sciences. The
researcher ran scale test to test the reliability of the questionnaire. The reliability

coefficient of the questionnaire was relatively high (  = 0.87). Then the Descriptive
Statistics Test was used to find out students’ motivation and their frequency use of
metacognitive strategies. Hence, correlation analyses were used to investigate their
relationship.

3.5 Data analysis
Data collected from the questionnaire was analyzed using SPSS for window
version 16.0. Descriptive analyses (mean, median, mode, and standard deviations)
were used to investigate participants’ motivation and metacognitive strategies for
English learning. The correlation analysis (Person- moment) was conducted to find
out the relationships between the students’ motivation and metacognitive strategies.

22


CTU non-majored English students’ motivation and metacognitive strategy use

Chapter 4
RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
The research methodology of the study was presented in the previous chapter. The
results for each research question will be displayed in this chapter. Based on the findings of
the study, some discussions will be withdrawn.

4.1. Normal distribution of data
Before any analysis, it is important to assure that data of the study are normally
distributed. Therefore, statistics of skewness and kurtosis of each question were
checked. Skewness and kurtosis of each question are displayed in Table 4.1.
Table 4.1: Descriptive statistics of students’ motivation
and metacognitive strategies (N= 110)


Mode

Median

Mean

SD

Skewness

Kurtosis

ITEM1

2.00

4.00

3.1545

.56156

.035

-.004

ITEM2

1.00


4.00

2.8273

.64764

-.438

.658

ITEM3

1.00

4.00

3.4364

.59858

-.796

1.001

ITEM4

2.00

4.00


3.4273

.61270

-.570

-.574

ITEM5

2.00

4.00

3.2545

.56563

-.023

-.392

ITEM6

2.00

4.00

3.0364


.60468

-.015

-.203

ITEM7

2.00

4.00

2.9909

.69725

.012

-.911

ITEM8

1.00

4.00

2.3000

.64324


.472

.405

ITEM9

1.00

4.00

2.5182

.68713

.279

-.211

ITEM10

2.00

4.00

2.9182

.60778

.039


-.265

ITEM11

1.00

4.00

2.6364

.72602

.097

-.354

ITEM12

1.00

4.00

2.0273

.72262

.405

.149


ITEM13

1.00

4.00

2.6455

.65786

-.654

.405

ITEM14

1.00

4.00

2.3636

.65982

.616

.336

23



CTU non-majored English students’ motivation and metacognitive strategy use

ITEM15

1.00

4.00

2.7364

.67290

-.182

.018

ITEM16

1.00

4.00

2.6364

.60164

-.415

.075


ITEM17

1.00

4.00

2.4545

.72487

-.060

-.250

ITEM18

1.00

4.00

2.6000

.73197

.217

-.393

ITEM19


1.00

4.00

2.9545

.47673

-1.174

.589

ITEM20

1.00

4.00

2.8818

.50196

-.671

1.101

ITEM21

2.00


4.00

2.8818

.51991

-.158

.549

ITEM22

1.00

4.00

2.8909

.58018

-.567

.552

ITEM23

1.00

4.00


3.0364

.55731

-.632

0.888

ITEM24

1.00

4.00

2.9091

.71093

-.647

.870

ITEM25

2.00

4.00

3.0364


.55731

.016

.301

ITEM26

2.00

4.00

2.6909

.55431

.017

-.602

ITEM27

1.00

4.00

2.9364

.52945


-.449

1.104

ITEM28

1.00

4.00

2.7636

.63430

.020

-.241

ITEM29

1.00

4.00

2.9545

.56481

-.635


.282

ITEM30

1.00

4.00

2.9545

.58083

-.285

.958

ITEM31

1.00

4.00

2.9727

.62749

-.434

1.014


ITEM32

1.00

4.00

2.7545

.54497

-.781

1.049

ITEM33

1.00

4.00

3.0818

.59249

-.559

.071

According to Table 4.1, all items in the questionnaire are normally distributed because

the value of both skewness and kurtosis are nearly zero.
4.2 Descriptive statistic of students’ motivation
In answer to research question 1: “Are non-majored English students
intrinsically or extrinsically motivated?” the descriptive analyses were employed.
After all variables in the questionnaire were analyzed, the mean scores (M), median,
mode, standard deviation (SD) of each type of motivation is presented in Table 4.2.

24