Feature Article
On the Motivation of Science Majors
Learning English as a Foreign
Language: A Case Study from Japan
Emiko Kaneko
University of Aizu
English has now become a global language, which necessitates reconsideration of Second
Language (L2) motivation, especially integrative motivation in an EFL context. In the
L2 Motivational Self System recently advanced by Dörnyei, integrative and instrumental
motivation are reformulated as a single, inseparable concept. The present study examines
how the motivation of Japanese EFL learners may be influenced by opportunities to listen tolectures in English given by possible Japanese role models as the students reflect upon their
future self-images. The students were all computer science majors in a rural area in Japan.
Under two kinds of measures, a questionnaire with open-ended questions and a modified
Attitude/Motivation Test Battery, the changes in English L2 motivation were examined
qualitatively. The results indicate that there were several types of positive changes, possibly
caused by the development of their ideal L2 selves. Though learner motivation is influenced
by many factors, exposure to established members of a target language community canpartly account for these changes.
ⱥㄒࡀᅜ㝿ㄒ࡜ࡋ࡚ࡢᆅ఩ࢆ☜❧ࡋࡓࡇ࡜࡛ࠊⱥㄒᏛ⩦ࡢືᶵ࡙ࡅ
㸦≉࡟()/⎔ቃ࡛ࡢ⤫ྜⓗືᶵ௜ࡅ㸧࡟ࡘ࠸࡚෌᳨ウࡢᚲせᛶࡀ⏕ࡌ࡚࠸
ࡿࠋ'¸UQ\HL࡟ࡼࡾᥦၐࡉࢀࡓ/0RWLYDWLRQDO6HOI6\VWHP࡛ࡣࠊ⤫ྜⓗࠊ㐨ලⓗືᶵ௜ࡅࢆࡘࡢ୙ྍศ࡞ᴫᛕ࡟⤌ࡳ┤ࡋࡓࡀࠊᮏ◊✲࡛ࡣࠊ᪥ᮏே
ⱥㄒᏛ⩦⪅ࡀࠊᑗ᮶ࡢ⮬ศീ࡟㏆࠸࡜ᛮࢃࢀࡿ࣮ࣟࣝࣔࢹࣝ࡟ࡼࡿⱥㄒࡢ
ㅮ⩏ࢆ⪺ࡃࡇ࡜࡛ࠊⱥㄒᏛ⩦࡟ᑐࡍࡿືᶵ࡙ࡅࡀ࡝ࡢࡼ࠺࡞ᙳ㡪ࢆཷࡅࡿࡢ
࠿ࢆㄪᰝࡋࡓࠋ᪥ᮏࡢᆅ᪉࡟ఫࡴࠊࢥࣥࣆ࣮ࣗࢱ⌮ᕤᏛᑓᨷࡢ኱Ꮫ⏕ࡀᮏ◊✲࡟ཧຍࡋࠊᙼࡽࡢືᶵ࡙ࡅࢆ⮬⏤ᅇ⟅ᙧᘧࡢ㉁ၥ࡜$WWLWXGH0RWLYDWLRQ
7HVW %DWWHU\ ࡢࡘࡢ᪉ἲ࡛⢭ᰝࡋࡓࠋࡑࡢ⤖ᯝࠊⱥㄒᏛ⩦࡟࠾ࡅࡿ⌮᝿ⓗ࡞⮬ศീ㸦LGHDO / VHOI㸧ࡀලయ໬ࡉࢀࡓࡇ࡜࡟ࡼࡾ⏕ࡌࡓ࡜᥎3ࡉࢀKanekoࡿࠊ⫯ᐃⓗ࡞ኚ໬ࡀほࡉࢀࡓࠋືᶵ࡙ࡅࡣከࡃࡢせᅉ࠿ࡽᙳ㡪ࢆཷࡅࡿࡀࠊ┠ᶆゝㄒ㸦ᅜ㝿ㄒ࡜ࡋ࡚ࡢⱥㄒ㸧⎔ቃࡢᵓᡂဨ࡜ࡢ᥋ゐࡀࠊࡇࡢኚ໬ࡢ
୍ᅉ࡛࠶ࡗࡓ࡜ᛮࢃࢀࡿࠋ

Motivation has been recognized as crucially important in sustaining efforts toachieve a future goal. With respect to language, Dörnyei (2005, 2006) formulated
the Second Language (L2) Motivational Self System, suggesting that learners’
vivid images of their ideal L2 selves are associated with higher motivation. This
paper reports on an attempt to motivate Japanese university students learning
English as a Foreign Language (EFL) following this framework. The participants
are university students majoring in computer science and engineering in Japan,
where English is one of the key subjects for admission to a university. Having
finished college entrance examinations, many of these students seem to havelost their sense of purpose in studying English. As an attempt to help thosestudents formulate more vivid future self-images, the present author, with thecooperation of the university, held a series of four conferences (the Symposia
on Global Citizenship) giving students opportunities to listen to short English
lectures presented by possible role models of their ideal L2 selves. The speakers
were Japanese business people who had grown up in Japan and used English
professionally in everyday work as members of the Global English community.
It was hypothesized that this experience would provide the students with aclearer ideal L2 self, resulting in a renewed enthusiasm for studying English. The
observed changes in the participants’ motivation are reported.
The paper first reviews how the conceptualization of integrative motivation
developed with the advent of Global English and then considers the motivationof Japanese university students majoring in science and engineering. The paper
will then describe the methodology adopted in this research, including the
Symposia on Global Citizenship, and present qualitative discussion on the resultsof two measures: an open-ended questionnaire conducted immediately after
each symposium and a modified Attitude/Motivation Test Battery (AMTB)
conducted before and after the four-month research period.
Though this is a report of a case study conducted in one university4

On the Motivation of..., OnCUE Journal, 6(2), pages3-26

specializing in computer science and engineering, important and potentially
useful implications are highlighted for educators whose students seem to sufferfrom a loss of sense of purpose in studying English.
Motivation in the Field of Second Language Acquisition
In the field of second language acquisition (SLA), motivation is regarded as oneof the important individual difference (ID) variables that account for the degreeof success in acquiring an L2. Gardner (1985) described L2 motivation as acomposite that involves “the combination of effort plus desire to achieve the goalof learning the language plus favorable attitudes toward learning the language”(p. 10).
Past research has shown that motivation is a multi-faceted, complex
construct. For example, the concepts of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation(Deci & Ryan, 1985) have been introduced and investigated extensively in SLA
research. More recent work (Dörnyei & Csizer, 2002; Williams & Burden, 1997)
identified other motivational constructs. Among these, research has refocusedon integrative motivation, which was first postulated by Gardner and Lambert(1959). This construct originally referred to “the desire to learn an L2 of a valued
community so that one can communicate with members of the community andsometimes even become like them” (Dörnyei & Ushioda, 2009, p. 22). This
was later re-interpreted in a broader sense to encompass a more general positive
disposition towards the target language community (Dörnyei, 1994; Gardner,
2001). According to Csizer and Dörnyei (2005), integrative motivation is the
single most important factor in shaping L2 motivated behavior though in studies
with Japanese students, instrumental factors have also consistently emerged(Irie, 2003; Johnson, 1996; McGuire, 2000; Miyahara, Nemoto, Yamanaka,
Murakami, Kinoshita, & Yamamoto, 1997; Yashima, 2000).
Emergence of Global English
As English has become a global communication tool, its use as a lingua franca
has increased worldwide, and the concept of integrativeness has evolved to reflect
the characteristics of the target language community of Global English (Coetzee5

Kaneko

Van Rooy, 2006). Because English does not belong to a specific, geographicallydefined community of speakers (Dörnyei & Ushioda, 2010), its target language
community is an abstract entity which does not reflect a particular culture or
region where native speakers live. In a sense, it is a virtual community. Accordingly,
those who can achieve what they want or need to through English can be regarded
as members of this target language community no matter where they live.
Another development in the concept of integrativeness, related to the first,
is the blending of integrative and instrumental motivation (Dörnyei, 2006). To
many EFL learners who wish to integrate with the virtual global community,
higher proficiency in L2 means more solid citizenship in the global community,
bringing with it pragmatic benefits such as meeting more people, enjoying more
opportunities, and finding lucrative jobs. This aspect of motivation, a desire toacquire an L2 as an instrument for achieving practical purposes, is traditionallyclassified as instrumental motivation. By attaining sufficient English proficiency
and enjoying these benefits, learners can regard themselves as members of a global
community. Consequently, for many EFL learners, integrative motivation can beviewed as an extension of instrumental motivation, underscoring that the twoconstructs are not easily separable.
Integrativeness as Part of Self-identity
Since the target language community for EFL learners is a non-specific, imagined,
virtual community, identity as a member of the Global English community canalso be an imagined identity (Wenger, 1998, cited in Dörnyei, 2006). This hasbrought about an intriguing reconceptualization of integrative motivation,
namely as being one aspect of individual identity. Dörnyei and Ushioda (2009)
argue that it should be considered not in reference to somebody else or an externalgroup of people (including a target language community) but in terms of the“internal domain of self and identity” (p. 3). Accordingly, integrative motivation
now means a basic identification process within the individual’s self-concept(Dörnyei, 2003; Dörnyei & Csizer, 2002).
Based on the new conceptualization of integrative motivation as self-identity,
Dörnyei proposed the “ideal self ” and the “ought-to self ” (or “ought self ”) in his
6On the Motivation of..., OnCUE Journal, 6(2), pages3-26

new theory, the L2 Motivational Self System (2005, 2009). The ideal self is “therepresentation of the attributes that one would ideally like to possess” (Dörnyei& Ushioda, 2009, p. 13). The attributes of the EFL learner’s ideal self can include
high English proficiency or membership in a global community, which will
facilitate the learner’s motivated behavior. Dörnyei referred to this L2-specificfacet of ideal self as “ideal L2 self ”. As a result, integrative motivation in SLA
has been reformulated as ideal L2 self. That is, if a learner’s imagined ideal L2
self is a person who is a competent member of a community in which English
is used as an instrument for particular purposes, that learner can be viewed ashaving an integrative disposition. In this way, the L2 Motivational Self System
encompasses both integrativeness and instrumentality and can be applied to therapidly globalizing EFL context.
Integrativeness as part of one’s identity is not easily alterable. Allen andHerron (2003) report that there was no significant change in learners’ integrative
motivation after a six-week study-abroad program in France. Gardner, Masgoret,
Tennant, & Mihic (2004) investigated the effects of a one-year language
instruction course on language attitudes, motivation, and anxiety. The results
showed no significant change in integrativeness (i.e., attitude toward French
Canadians, interest in foreign languages or integrative orientation).
Motivation of Japanese EFL Learners
Having briefly reviewed the development of the conceptualization of L2
motivation, this section moves on to describe the motivation of the EFL learners
who participated in the present study, namely Japanese university students
majoring in computer science and engineering.
Japanese children study English as part of their mandatory education before
choosing their undergraduate major subject. Passing the entrance examinations
for high school and university very often becomes the primary purpose of studying
English until matriculation. Under the current Japanese educational system, thesubjects covered in these university entrance examinations differ according towhat the student hopes to major in at college or university. Personal experiencesuggests that those who seek to major in science generally do not study English as
7

Kanekoseriously in high school as those who wish to study humanities.
Moreover, after they are admitted to university, many students whose major
is not directly related to English lose any sense of purpose in studying English,
resulting in unimpressive levels of English proficiency. The average score on the
Test of English for International Communication (TOEIC) for university, juniorcollege, and specialized schools’ students majoring in science, engineering or
agriculture was 409 (equivalent to TOEFL Paper Based Test or ‘PBT’ 427), andthat for information science majors, the field of study to which participants inthe present study belong, was 390 (equivalent to TOEFL PBT 421), while thosefor law majors and sociology majors were both 441 (equivalent to TOEFL PBT438), and that for international relations major was 479 (equivalent to TOEFL
PBT 452) (Educational Testing Service, 2010). Some mature and professionallyminded students may recognize the necessity of English as they continue to study
it in college and regain their sense of purpose in studying the language while some
may not.

Methodology
PurposeThe goal of the present study was to investigate the effects of the provision ofvivid and realistic role models on L2 motivation. The participants were Japanese
undergraduates majoring in computer science and engineering. The research
examines the types of changes (if any) in L2 motivation self-reported after hearing
English lectures by possible role models. The investigation was implemented byoffering a series of symposia, outlined below. The results of two measures, also
explained in a later section, were analyzed qualitatively.
Having a vivid image of one’s ideal L2 self can give a sense of purpose andmotivation, but Japanese science EFL students living in a rural area in northeasternJapan are not easily exposed to the global community, and this makes it difficult
for them to create a vivid image of their ideal L2 selves. In order to present themwith possible models for their own ideal L2 selves, four symposia were held, oneeach month between November 2009 and February 2010, with two invited8On the Motivation of..., OnCUE Journal, 6(2), pages3-26

speakers on each occasion. The attempt was made to select eight speakers who
were members of the Global English community by applying the following
five criteria: possessing Japanese citizenship; having spent most of their lives inJapan; having studied in the regular Japanese educational system; having learned
the basics of English through formal instruction; and using English for theirinternational business. Among the eight speakers, six were working for a company.
Two of them were presidents, two were graduates of the university where thesymposia were held, and the last two were company employees who graduatedfrom other universities. The remaining two were professional counselors on
studying abroad. It would have been ideal to have only former science majors as
speakers, but it was extremely difficult to find business people who were willingto come to northeastern Japan and who had high enough English proficiency togive a lecture in English. Therefore, only four of the speakers held a bachelor’s
degree in science, but none of the eight had majored in English.
They were asked to give a 30- to 40-minute lecture in plain English. The
topics included, but were not limited to professional development; English in
the workplace; global diversity and tolerance; global team management; working
in an international environment; their experiences as a learner and a professionaluser of World English; what they did and should have done in college; and any
advice they might have for university students. The symposia were held on Friday
evenings once a month in a big lecture theater, which can hold over 250 students.
Each symposium had about 80 attendees on average, the majority of whom were
undergraduates.
Participants
The Symposia on Global Citizenship were open to all students (undergraduates,
graduates and junior college students) and university faculty members. To
evaluate any influence of the symposia on university students, 38 undergraduateswere recruited. They volunteered by responding to the email calling forparticipation in this research. Their responsibilities included completing preand post-treatment measures and attending three or more symposia, but it
transpired that only 19 fulfilled this commitment, to whom a 1,000 yen book9

Kanekocertificate was awarded as a gratuity. Participants ranged from first to fourthyear students of computer science and engineering. Their English proficiency
was fairly low (average TOEIC score 350, SD = 86, equivalent to TOEFL PBT418), and many of them did not study English unless it was a required subject.
However, the university where this research was conducted requires students towrite a graduation thesis in English, a lingua franca in the field of informationand communications technology and offers courses of English for Science andTechnology. Furthermore, about 40% of the faculty members are non-Japanese.
By learning English in such an environment, students should have awareness of
the importance of English in their field.
Measure 1 – The questionnaire
Two measures were used to examine students’ L2 motivation. The first, a shortquestionnaire (Appendix A) was conducted directly after each symposium to
examine students’ feelings because heightened motivation immediately after thelecture would likely diminish relatively quickly thereafter. The questionnaire wasdistributed at the beginning of each symposium to all attendees (not only the 38
study participants), who were requested to answer it after listening to the lecturesand submit it to a box placed at the front before they left the venue. Providing
personal information was optional, but many attendees provided their names andstudent numbers voluntarily. The questionnaire had four items. There was one
four-point Likert scale question asking for a global impression of the symposium(from “Very good” to “Needs improvement”); two open-ended questions, “Whatare some impressive points in today’s lecture?” and “What are your opinions
about the content of today’s lecture?”; and two questions asking how much of thetwo English lectures they understood. The degree of comprehension was asked
separately for each lecturer because their presentation styles as well as English
varied to a great extent. They answered these by choosing a point on a line,
indicating 0% understanding on the left end to 100% on the right end.
The survey was made intentionally short in order to maximize the response
rate; if respondents had to stay long to answer it (the lectures were held on Friday
evening), they would have been reluctant to take the survey. If it had been taken
10On the Motivation of..., OnCUE Journal, 6(2), pages3-26

home for completion, on the other hand, many of the participants likely would
not have taken the trouble to answer and submit the survey on a later day. Still
there were students who did not answer all the questions.
0HDVXUH²0RGLÀHG$07%
The second measure was created by modifying and translating items of Gardner’s
Attitude/Motivation Test Battery (AMTB) – English version (Gardner, 2004)
into Japanese though this modified form was not revalidated. There were 100
six-point Likert scale items, rated from 1 (Strong disagreement) to 6 (Strong
agreement). Due to the large number of items, only the 16 most relevant to thediscussion pertaining to this study are provided in Appendix B. The responses
to negatively worded items (inverse items) were reverse-coded when the results
were calculated (e.g., 6 points were reverse-coded as 1 point, 2 as 5, and so on)
so that higher points consistently indicated higher motivation. Measure 2 wasadministered online before the first symposium in October 2009 as a pre-test andafter the last one in February 2010 as a post-test. The 38 students were instructed
to answer the questions intuitively. They were allowed to take measure 2 anywherein order to secure a 100% response rate, though this made it impossible to control
the conditions under which they completed the measure and other extraneous
variables.
In contrast with measure 1, the goal of this second measure was to identify
any changes in their L2 motivation over the four-month period. Changes in theirmotivation can be attributed to many factors, such as English classes, experience
outside school, people they have met, books, TV programs, magazines etc., butparticipation in the symposia might be one of them.

Results and Discussion
In this section, the results of measures 1 and 2 are discussed. Several types ofchanges related to their motivation and ideal L2 self were found. Six students
who represent different patterns of changes are discussed here.
Case 1: Only instrumental motivation improved.
11KanekoCase 2: Integrative motivation improved with initially high instrumental
motivation.
Case 3: Both integrative and instrumental motivation improved, resulting in
better liking of English.
Case 4: Attitude toward learning English improved, resulting in improved
integrative motivation.
Case 5: Instrumental and integrative motivation were initially high, andmotivated behavior was facilitated.
Case 6: Instrumental motivation seemed to have deteriorated.
In what follows, English translations of participants’ answers to the openended questions in measure 1 are provided first in italics. Because the items
elicited general feelings and opinions after listening to the lectures, only responses
pertinent to the research question are discussed here. The symposium and item
number that the response relates to are indicated in the parentheses after the
response. The types of changes that are inferred from their answers are also
indicated. Though the concept of ideal L2 self encompasses both integrative andinstrumental motivation, when it is clearly associated with either, it is so indicated.
It should be noted that participants’ responses to the survey were based on what
they understood from the English lectures. The averages of the 19 participants’
self-reported comprehension of the lectures ranged from approximately 55% to
90% across the eight lectures.
Next, measure 2 results are presented and discussed. The question statements
used are presented within quotation marks. When the responses between the preand post-treatment administrations differ by two points or more, it was regarded
that a change had taken place. Considering that the items were presented in a sixpoint Likert scale, a change of two points was not trivial. If a student (dis)agreed
or strongly (dis)agreed in the pre-test and the difference could not be two points
or more because of the ceiling effect, special attention was paid, and the changes
in their motivation were analyzed holistically, taking the responses to measure
1 and other items in measure 2 into account. Because the concept of ideal L2
self involves integrative and instrumental motivation, the items associated withthese two kinds of motivation are mainly examined here. When necessary, items
12

On the Motivation of..., OnCUE Journal, 6(2), pages3-26

that involve other kinds of motivation (e.g., intention to make actual efforts, or
attitude toward learning English) are also discussed.
Case 1: Participant H (male, sophomore, attended three
symposia)
Measure 1
This was very stimulating, and now I feel like I have finally found what I should aim
at. (November Symposium, Q2) – Clearer image of his ideal L2 self.
I felt like my attitude toward English has changed by learning something new inEnglish, rather than by learning English. (December Symposium, Q2) – Increased
instrumental motivation.
I wish I could speak English well and fight and survive in a globalized society.
(December Symposium, Q3) – Conceptualization of his ideal L2 self.
These responses indicate that participant H obtained a clearer image of his
ideal L2 self after listening to lectures in November and December. However, theresults of measure 2 show a slightly different picture.
Measure 2
The only measure that showed the improvement was the one concerning the
instrumental motivation, item 10 “Studying English is important because it
will be useful in getting a good job.” He strongly agreed with this in the posttest while he had only slightly agreed with it in the pre-test. However, his
integrative motivation decreased; he strongly disagreed with item 5 “Knowing
English isn’t really an important goal in my life” in the pre-test but only slightly
disagreed with it in the post-test. This suggests that the clearer self-image hehad perceived in November and December weakened gradually over the threemonths. Furthermore, improvement of his L2-related behavior was not observed.
He slightly disagreed with item 1 “I don’t pay much attention to the feedback
I receive in my English class” in the pre-test but slightly agreed with this in the
post-test. Similarly, he only slightly disagreed that “I don’t bother checking myassignments when I get them back from my English teacher” (item 7) in both preand post-tests. These responses to measures 1 and 2 suggest that the instrumental
13

Kanekomotivation improved but that the concrete image of his ideal L2 self perceived
in November and December was not sustained, resulting in no changes in his
behavior.
Case 2: Student K (male, junior, attended three symposia)
Measure 1
It was good that I could learn what kind of English skills are required by companies.
(November Symposium, Q3) – Stimulus to instrumental motivation.
When reading documents about specs [for developing applications] and sellingcomputer applications, if I can use English as a means of communication, I will enjoy
more options. (December Symposium, Q2) – Clearer image of his ideal L2 self
and increased instrumental motivation.
The QA session after the lectures made me think about the future of this country.
(February Symposium, Q3) – Conceptualization of his ideal L2 self.
This student regarded English as a communication tool used in companies in
November, and one month later, he developed a clearer vision about his future,
being a global computer software developer/dealer. During the last symposium,
he thought of what he would be able to do as a Japanese who would also be amember of the global community. His future L2 self became more realistic withimproved instrumental and integrative motivation.
Measure 2
He had a strong instrumental motivation even before attending the symposia.
He disagreed with item 2 “I won’t get a job that requires English” and agreed
with item 8 “Studying English is important because it will allow me to meetand converse with more and varied people” and item 10 “Studying English isimportant because it will be useful in getting a good job,” all of which indicate his
moderately strong instrumental motivation. In the post-test, he strongly disagreed
with item 2 and strongly agreed with items 8 and 10, suggesting his instrumental
motivation became even stronger. (The difference in the scores of these items is
only one point due to the ceiling effect). What distinguishes Student K from
Student H is that his integrative motivation also increased. Student K slightly
14

On the Motivation of..., OnCUE Journal, 6(2), pages3-26

agreed with item 5 “Knowing English isn’t really an important goal in my life”
in the pre-test but strongly disagreed with it in the post-test, indicating that his
ideal self-concept now included high English proficiency, an essential attribute tosecure membership within the global community. This, and his strong intention
to use English for his career and for meeting and conversing with more and varied
people, suggests that he perceived a stronger desire to become a member of thetarget language community.
Case 3: Student N (male, junior, attended four symposia)
Measure 1
It is important to try to believe that English is important. (November Symposium,
Q2) – Attempt to increase instrumental motivation.
It is important to continue to practice, reading, speaking, and listening toEnglish. Never give up. (November Symposium, Q3) – Intention to make efforts.
Practice of speaking and listening to English is necessary to be good at English.
(December Symposium, Q2) – Acknowledgement of the importance of practice.
English is necessary to broaden my own world. (February Symposium, Q3) –Conceptualization of his ideal L2 self.
Proficiency in English will enable me to have a wider global network. (February
Symposium, Q2) – Strong instrumental motivation and conceptualization of his
ideal L2 self.
It seems as if he intentionally tried to believe that English was important andthat sustained efforts were necessary to learn English in November and December,though solely from these responses, it cannot be known whether he actually madeefforts. In the last symposium, his ambition to have a larger global network in thewider world became associated with high English ability. This association implies
that his ideal L2 self should be competent in English.
Measure 2
Student N demonstrated improvement in seven items by two points or more,which was the largest number of items that showed changes among the 19
students. Only four items that depict the types of changes he went through are15

Kanekodiscussed here to avoid repetition. His deliberate attempt to believe that English
is important seemed successful. His instrumental motivation became stronger.
He agreed with item 14 “I won’t have any difficulties at work even if I cannot
use English” in the pre-test but disagreed with it in the post-test. His integrative
motivation also improved from slight disagreement with item 5 “Knowing English
isn’t really an important goal in my life” in the pre-test to strong disagreement in
the post-test. Most of all, he came to like English more and hoped to acquire
English skills beyond a basic level. He strongly agreed with items 6 “I hate English”
and 15 “I haven’t any great wish to learn more than the basics of English” in the
pre-test whereas in the post-test he slightly disagreed with them. Although thesechanges in measure 2 with this magnitude were noteworthy, as conceded above,
they cannot be attributed solely to participation in the symposia, because otherextraneous variables may have intervened to change his attitude toward learning
English over these four months.
Case 4: Student O (male, freshman, attended three symposia)
Measure 1
I have truly realized the importance of English. I would like to make even more
efforts. (November Symposium, Q3) – Increased instrumental motivation andincreased intention to make efforts.
After the November Symposium, he decided to make the effort to learn more
English, which itself is not unusual after listening to a stimulating talk. Whatis special about Student O is that he actually demonstrated a better attitude
toward learning English in the results of measure 2, discussed below. In fact, hewrote I could understand this very last symposium very well!! after the February
symposium. Though self-evaluation is not always accurate, this comment can beinterpreted as a sign of his confidence in English.
Measure 2
Student O gained a better attitude toward learning English and had morepositive feelings about English and stronger integrative motivation. He agreed
with item 11 “I tend to give up and not pay attention when I don’t understand my16

On the Motivation of..., OnCUE Journal, 6(2), pages3-26

English teacher’s explanation of something” in the pre-treatment administration
but disagreed with it in the post-treatment measure. He also started to enjoy
watching foreign TV shows with English subtitles more than those dubbed into
Japanese. He slightly agreed with item 13 “I would rather see a TV program
dubbed into our language than in its own language with subtitles” in the pre-test
but strongly disagreed with it in the post-test. It is conceivable that he enjoyedlearning English and liked it more as a result of his own efforts and success. In
fact, he only slightly disagreed with item 6 “I hate English” before the series of
symposia, but he strongly disagreed with it after attending them, and he disagreed
that “Learning English is really great” (item 3) in the pre-test but agreed with it in
the post-test. Furthermore, having high English oral proficiency became part ofhis future self; he agreed with item 5 “Knowing English isn’t really an important
goal in my life” in the pre-test but disagreed with it in the post-test. Again, it iscertain that many factors contributed to his growth, but it is probable that his
participation in the four symposia was one of them. Apparently, he maintained
his strong motivation. At the time of writing this paper, two years after the last
symposium, he is studying in the United States in the university’s mid-term
exchange program.
Case 5: Student I (female, junior, attended four symposia)
Measure 1
I will make efforts to become able to understand spoken English without relying
on visual support. (November Symposium, Q2) – Increased intention to makeefforts.
It sounded very attractive that we can sell things and communicate with people
in the world using information technology. English is also a powerful tool to deal
with the world. (December Symposium, Q3) – Strong instrumental motivationand conceptualization of her ideal L2 self.
Being able to understand English has made it possible that I actually enjoy
knowing something new. I would like to continue working on my English. (February
Symposium, Q2) – Strong instrumental motivation and intention to continue
her efforts.
17

KanekoAccording to her responses to the open-ended questions, she was a motivatedstudent from the beginning. Since this university is a computer science university,
many of the students view themselves as future IT professionals, and she seems tointegrate her identity as an IT specialist and as an English user, a possible imageof her ideal (L2) self in December.
Measure 2
The results of the pre-treatment administration indicate that she had highintegrative and instrumental motivation even before the symposia started andkept them high over the four months. She strongly agreed with item 8 “Studying
English is important because it will allow me to meet and converse with more andvaried people” and strongly disagreed with item 5 “Knowing English isn’t reallyan important goal in my life” in both pre- and post-treatment administrations.
With high integrative and instrumental motivation, she made more efforts tolearn English, indicated by the fact that she disagreed that “I make a point oftrying to understand all the English I see and hear” (item 4) in the pre-test, butslightly agreed in the post-test. Her attitude toward learning English also changed
positively; she disagreed that “Learning English is really great” (item 3) in the
pre-test but agreed with it in the post-test. Similarly, she slightly agreed with item
9 “I put off my English homework as much as possible” in the pre-test while she
disagreed with the item in the post-test. Unfortunately however, it is unclear how
her more concrete future self-image caused by the participation in the symposia
and the originally high instrumental and integrative motivation induced these
positive changes in her behavior.
Case 6: Student U (male, junior, attended four symposia)
Measure 1
Rather than spending time to earn money now [such as for a part-time job], it ismore important to spend time for acquiring English, which will become necessary
in the future. ( January Symposium, Q3) – Intention to make efforts and strong
instrumental motivation.
Student U left many of the items in the survey blank. This response suggests
18

On the Motivation of..., OnCUE Journal, 6(2), pages3-26

that perhaps he knew English was important for his future and had intention to
study English. This trait is not rare among the participants, but he had additional
peculiar, but understandable, changes, discussed below.
Measure 2
Student U’s instrumental motivation deteriorated by three points. He agreed
that “Studying English is important because it will be useful in getting a goodjob” (item 10) in the pre-test but disagreed with it in the post-test. Consideringthat the usefulness of English in finding a job was one of the most commonly
discussed topics in the symposia, and that Student U appears to be motivatedfrom his response to the open-ended question, this result seems contradictory.
There are two possible explanations. The first is that he liked learning English.
He strongly agreed with items 12 “I plan to learn as much English as possible”
and 16 “English is one of my favorite courses” in both pre- and post-treatment
administrations of measure 2. In other words, his intrinsic motivation was
originally very high, and possibly became higher for some reason, which might
have caused him to feel reluctant to degrade English to just a means to get a goodjob. Another possible reason is that he decided not to find a job. In fact, now, twoyears after the symposia ended, he is in graduate school. It is possible that he had
decided to be a researcher sometime during these four months. For him, English
is important to do research and write papers, but not to find a good job.
In summary, analyzing the responses to the two measures revealed that
there were several types of changes in L2 motivation in the four-month period:
improvement in one or both of instrumental and integrative motivation, more
concrete and clearer ideal L2 self-image, more efforts to learn English, or a morefavorable disposition toward English. The results confirm that L2 motivation
is a complicated variable of individual difference, being influenced by manyfactors. In addition, which aspects of L2 motivation are affected by a particularexperience and how strongly they are affected also differ from student to student.

19Kaneko

Limitations
In addition to those already stated, there are some other weaknesses in thisstudy. The most significant is that the effects of the symposia on ideal L2 self
were inferred from the answers to the open-ended questions in the survey andthe items concerning integrative and instrumental motivation in the modified
AMTB. Questions directly asking what kind of ideal self they had before theseries of symposia and how it changed after attending them would have revealed
how the symposia influenced participants’ ideal L2 selves more clearly.
There are also a few modifications that probably should be made if anotherset of similar symposia were held. In these four symposia, the speakers were mucholder than the participants, and most of them had high social status, which might
have prevented the students from perceiving them as plausible models. In the
future, persons closer to the students in terms of status and age could be invitedas speakers. Additionally, based on the fact that the majority of these students
in this study would go on to work for companies after they graduated, it was
assumed that the kind of global society they would belong to in the future would
be one where engineers of various nationalities communicate with each other forbusiness purposes, hence the speakers were selected accordingly. However, forstudents with a different self-image, the symposia may not have been influential,
as exemplified by Student U. Finally, many of the items in measure 2 used theexpression “native speakers of English” instead of “those who are proficient inEnglish,” and it would be helpful to revise these items.

Conclusion
This paper reports a case study conducted in a computer science university inJapan. The purpose of the study was to develop in students the goal of studying
English within the framework of Dörnyei’s L2 Motivational Self System. A seriesof four symposia were held, each of which had two speakers who likely sharedsome of the same characteristics as the students’ ideal L2 selves. The motivationof computer science majors was investigated qualitatively via two measures, one
designed to identify the short-term effects of the lectures in the symposia and the20On the Motivation of..., OnCUE Journal, 6(2), pages3-26

other the change in motivation over a four-month period. Among 19 students
who completed the research protocol, six students, representing different patternsof changes, were discussed in this paper. Examining the short-term and midterm effects of the lectures over the four-month period offered insights into thestudents’ development of L2 motivation. The developments in their feelings andthoughts might have been caused by many factors — it is by no means the claim
here that the series of symposia triggered all these changes — but it is nonethelessprobable that participation in the symposia accounts for these in part.
As discussed, after the entrance examination, many university students inscience and engineering seem to lose their sense of purpose in studying English(aside from earning sufficient credits to graduate). The present study indicates that
it is possible for the university and English teachers to help them form a clearer
image of their ideal L2 selves by leading them to recognize the importance andusefulness of English as an instrument for achieving something more practical. It
is the students themselves who make the decision whether they want to belong
to a global society, and if they do, what particular society they wish to belong to,since this concerns the construction of their identity. Nonetheless, the author
believes that it is one of the responsibilities of higher education to show themas many options for their future as possible. With concrete and clear images of
their future selves as members of a target language community of Global English,
it is expected that English instruction will become more effective for Japanese
students who would not otherwise perceive an immediate need for it.

Acknowledgements
I am grateful to the anonymous reviewers for their invaluable constructive
comments on a previous version. I would also like to thank the co-editor for
his insightful advice and tremendous support on the completion of the paper.
Finally, I am most grateful to the speakers in the symposia who travelled so far
to visit the research setting despite their busy schedules, and to the students who
participated in them.

21Kaneko

References
Allen, H. W., & Herron, C. (2003). A mixed-methodology investigation of
the linguistic and affective outcomes of summer study abroad. Foreign
Language Annals, 36(3), 370-385.
Coetzee-Van Rooy, S. (2006). Integrativeness: Untenable for world Englishes
learners. World Englishes, 25(3-4), 437-450.
Csizer, K., & Dörnyei, Z. (2005). The internal structure of language learning
motivation and its relationship with language choice and learning effort.
Modern Language Journal, 89(1), 19-36.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination inhuman behavior. New York, NY: Plenum Press.
Dörnyei, Z. (1994). Motivation and motivating in the foreign language
classroom. Modern Language Journal, 78(3), 273-284.
Dörnyei, Z. (2003). Attitudes, orientations, and motivations in language
learning: Advances in theory, research, and applications. West Sussex,
England: Wiley-Blackwell.
Dörnyei, Z. (2005). The psychology of the language learner: Individual differences
in second language acquisition. New York, NY: Routledge.
Dörnyei, Z. (2006). Individual differences in second language acquisition.
AILA Review, 19, 42-68.
Dörnyei, Z. (2009). The psychology of second language acquisition. Oxford,
England: Oxford University Press.
Dörnyei, Z., & Csizer, K. (2002). Some dynamics of language attitudes
and motivation: Results of a longitudinal nationwide survey. Applied
Linguistics, 23(4), 421-462.
Dörnyei, Z., & Ushioda, E. (Eds.) (2009). Motivation, language identity and theL2 self. Bristol, England: Multilingual Matters.
Dörnyei, Z., & Ushioda, E. (2010). Teaching and researching: Motivation. Essex,
England: Pearson Education.
Educational Testing Service. (2010). TOEIC Test Data & Analysis 2010.
Retrieved from http://www.toeic.or.jp/toeic_en/pdf/data/TOEIC_DAA2010.pdf
22

On the Motivation of..., OnCUE Journal, 6(2), pages3-26

Gardner, R. C. (1985). The role of attitudes and motivation. Baltimore, MD: E.
Arnold.
Gardner, R. C. (2001). Integrative motivation and second language acquisition.
In Z. Dörnyei, & R. Schmidt (Eds.), Motivation and second language
acquisition (pp. 1-19). Honolulu, HI: University of Hawai’i Press.
Gardner, R. C. (2004). Attitude/Motivation test battery: International AMTB
research report. Retrieved from The University of Western Ontario website:
http://publish.uwo.ca/~gardner/docs/englishamtb.pdff
Gardner, R. C., & Lambert, W. E. (1959). Motivational variables in secondlanguage acquisition. Canadian Journal of Psychology/Revue canadienne de
psychologie, 13(4) 266-272.
Gardner, R. C., Masgoret, A.M., Tennant, J., & Mihic, L. (2004). Integrative
motivation: Changes during a year-long intermediate-level language course.
Language Learning, 54, 1-34.
Irie, K. (2003). What do we know about the language learning motivation ofuniversity students in Japan? Some patterns in survey studies. JALT Journal,25(1), 86-100.
Johnson, J. (1996). Learning orientations, motivation and EFL proficiency infirst-year Japanese university students. Temple University Japan Working
Papers in Applied Linguistics, 8, 50-58.
McGuire, S. (2000). Motivation and language learning. Nagoya University ofArts Research Journal, 21, 51-61.
Miyahara, F., Nemoto, M., Yamanaka, H., Murakami, R., Kinoshita, M., &Yamamoto, H. (1997). Konamamade yoinoka daigaku eigo kyouiku (Thecurrent concerns on English language teaching at colleges and universities).
Tokyo, Japan: Shouhakusha.
Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning and identity.
Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Williams, M., & Burden, R. L. (1997). Psychology for language teachers: A social
constructivist approach. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Yashima, T. (2000). Orientations and motivation in foreign language learning:
A study of Japanese college students. JACET Bulletin, 31, 121-133.
23

Kaneko$XWKRU·V%LR
Emiko Kaneko is a senior associate professor in the Center for Language Research at
the University of Aizu, specializing in English language acquisition and instruction
for science and engineering, with special interest in learner motivation and teaching/assessment of L2 speaking. Her Ph.D. in English comes from the University of
Wisconsin – Milwaukee. kaneko@u-aizu.ac.jp.

Received: September 14, 2011
Accepted: August 15, 201224

On the Motivation of..., OnCUE Journal, 6(2), pages3-26

Appendix A
Measure 1:
This survey was conducted in Japanese.
Symposia on Global CitizenshipThank you very much for attending the Symposium on Global Citizenship. We
would like to hear your opinions on today’s lectures.
1. What is your overall impression about the symposium?
Very good Good Not very good Needs improvement
2. What are your opinions about the content of today’s lectures?
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
3. What are some impressive points in today’s lectures?
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
4. How much of each English lecture did you understand? Please mark the mostappropriate point on the scales below:

If you don’t mind, please provide your name and student number below.
Name: _____________________________________
Student Number: _____________________________
Thank you for your cooperation.
25

KanekoAppendix B
Measure 2: Items discussed in this paper:
Students indicated the level of agreement with a situation described by an item byselecting one of the following Likert options:
1. Strongly disagree
4. Slightly agree
2. Disagree
5. Agree
3. Slightly disagree
6. Strongly agree
When the original AMTB was translated into Japanese, the choice of “moderately(dis)agree” was replaced by “(dis)agree” due to the unnaturalness of Japanesewording.
1. I don’t pay much attention to the feedback I receive in my English class.
2. I won’t get a job that requires English.
3. Learning English is really great.
4. I make a point of trying to understand all the English I see and hear.
5. Knowing English isn’t really an important goal in my life.
6. I hate English.
7. I don’t bother checking my assignments when I get them back from myEnglish teacher.
8. Studying English is important because it will allow me to meet and converse
with more and varied people.
9. I put off my English homework as much as possible.
10. Studying English is important because it will be useful in getting a good job.
11. I tend to give up and not pay attention when I don’t understand my English
teacher’s explanation of something.
12. I plan to learn as much English as possible.
13. I would rather see a TV program dubbed into our language than in its own
language with subtitles.
14. I won’t have any difficulties at work even if I cannot use English.
15. I haven’t any great wish to learn more than the basics of English.
16. English is one of my favorite courses.
26