Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
A STRUCTURAL EQUATION MODELING OF
METACOGNITION AND MOTIVATION IN
VOCABULARY LEARNING STRATEGY USE
BY
NADYA SUPIAN
A dissertation submitted in fulfilment of the requirement for
the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Education
Institute of Education
International Islamic University Malaysia
FEBRUARY 2014
ii
ABSTRACT
Effective use of vocabulary learning strategies such as guessing, dictionary use,
memory recall and activation makes learners more independent and capable of taking
on more responsibility for their own learning, involvement and proficiency. The act of
regulating the use of these learning strategies is known as metacognition.
Metacognition refers to the condition of having executive control over one’s cognitive
processes, and being aware of one’s thinking while performing a specific task and
then using this awareness to regulate what one is doing. Similarly, having a strong
motivation to succeed in language learning goals is considered just as important as
having the language aptitude for the successful acquisition of the target language.
Motivation can be said to consist of 3 components, namely instrinsic motivation,
extrinsic motivation, control of learning beliefs and self-efficacy. This research aimed
to identify if a relationship exists among metacognition, motivation and vocabulary
learning strategy use. The study was focused on finding out to what extent
1)metacognition influences motivation, 2)motivation influences vocabulary learning
strategy use and 3)metacognition influences vocabulary learning strategy use via
motivation. Data was collected from 201 students from a private local university and
analysed using structural equation modelling. The results indicated a good model fit
(χ² = 263.928, df= 162, p = 0.0001), with a CMIN/df of 1.629.TLI = 0.923, CFI =
0.934, RMSEA = 0.056. It was found that metacognition does influence motivation to
a large extent, thus a learner who is metacognitively aware is more likely to be highly
motivated in his or her learning. It was also reported that motivated learners who were
metacognitively engaged were more likely to employ a more effective application of
vocabulary learning strategies.
iii
(χ² =
263.928, df= 162, p = 0.0001)(CMIN/df of 1.629.TLI = 0.923, CFI = 0.934,
RMSEA = 0.056)
iv
ABSTRAK
Keberkesanan penggunaan strategi pembelajaran perbendaharaan kata seperti meneka,
penggunaan kamus, serta strategi memori boleh dikatakan mampu menjadikan pelajar
lebih berdikari dan lebih terlibat dalam process pembelajaran mereka sendiri.
Penyeliaan penggunaan strategi pembelajaran dikenali sebagai metacognisi.
Metakognisi merujuk kepada kawalan eksekutif terhadap proses kognitif serta
kesedaran pemikiran semasa melakukan tugas tertentu, seterusnya menggunakan
kesedaran ini untuk mengawal tindakan. Di samping itu, motivasi yang kuat untuk
berjaya dalam matlamat pembelajaran bahasa jga dianggap penting untuk berjaya
dalam menguasai bahasa sasaran. Motivasi boleh dikatakan terdiri daripada 3
komponen iaitu motivasi instrinsik, motivas ekstrinsic, kawalan kepercayaan
pembelajaran dan keberkesanan diri. Kajian ini bertujuan meyelidik 1) sejauh mana
metakognisi dapat mempengaruhi motivasi, 2) sejauh mana motivasi dapat
mempengaruhi pengunaan strategi pembelajaran perbendaharaan kata dan 3) sejauh
mana metakognisi dapat mempengaruhi penggunaan strategi pembelajaran
perbendaharaan kata melalui motivasi. Data telah dikumpulkan dari 201 pelajar dan
dianalisis menggunakan structural equation modeling. Keputusan menunjukkan model
yang baik (χ² = 263.928, df= 162, p = 0.0001)), dengan CMIN/df of 1.629.TLI =
0.923, CFI = 0.934, RMSEA = 0.056. Hasil kajian mendapati kesedaran metakognitif
yang tinggi akan lebih bermotivasi dalam pembelajarannya, serta lebih cenderung
untuk menggunakan aplikasi strategi pembelajaran perbendaharaan kata dengan lebih
berkesan.
v
APPROVAL PAGE
The thesis of Nadya Supian has been approved by the following:
______________________________
Ratnawati binti Mohd Asraf
Supervisor
______________________________
Mohamed Sahari bin Nordin
Co-Supervisor
______________________________
Ainol Madziah bt Zubairi
Internal Examiner
______________________________
Imran Ho bin Abdullah
External Examiner
______________________________
Chairman
vi
DECLARATION
I hereby declare that this dissertation is the result of my own investigations, except
where otherwise stated. I also declare that it has not been previously or concurrently
submitted as a whole for any other degrees at IIUM or other institutions.
Nadya Supian
Signature …………………………………… Date ……………………..
vii
INTERNATIONAL ISLAMIC UNIVERSITY MALAYSIA
DECLARATION OF COPYRIGHT AND AFFIRMATION
OF FAIR USE OF UNPUBLISHED RESEARCH
Copyright © 2014 by Nadya Supian. All rights reserved.
A STRUCTURAL EQUATION MODEL OF METACOGNITION,
MOTIVATION AND VOCABULARY LEARNING STRATEGY
USE
No part of this unpublished research may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system,
or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying,
recording or otherwise without prior written permission of the copyright holder except
as provided below.
1. Any material contained in or derived from this unpublished
research may only be used by others in their writing with due
acknowledgement.
2. IIUM or its library will have the right to make and transmit copies (print
or electronic) for institutional and academic purposes.
3. The IIUM library will have the right to make, store in a retrieval system
and supply copies of this unpublished research if requested by other
universities and research libraries.
Affirmed by Nadya Supian
……………………………. ………………..
Signature Date
viii
Syukur Alhamdulillah. All Praise to Allah SWT for all his blessings.
This thesis is dedicated to the most important people in my life, all of whom provided
support and inspiration in their own way. You are my Dream Team always.
To my parents, Haji Supian Hj Ali and Arwah Ungku Hendon Ungku Mohd - thanks
for inspiring me to pursue my ambitions and to persevere.
To my siblings Suraya and Zafrul - thanks for your emotional and physical support
throughout the years.
To my husband Ahmad Saiful Rizal - thanks for being the wind in my sails, the turbo
to my engine and the fuel in my rocket. You truly are the better half of me!
To my daughters, Helwa and Nabilah, you are worth a thousand suns each! Thanks
for inspiring me each day with your love, wit and compassion.
To my mother-in-law Hajah Noor Baiti bt Yahaya, thank you for your love and
support. This thesis is for you too!
And a big thank you to my domestic helpers - Bibik Wastem, Bibik Lia Agustina and
Bibik Musliana for keeping all things running on the homefront.
May Allah bless you all.
ix
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Firstly I wish to thank my supervisor, Professor Dr Ratnawati Asraf for her wisdom,
dedication and support. I also wish to thank Professor Dr. Mohd Sahari Nordin for his
guidance.
I would like to extend my gratitude to the Dean of the Institute of Education,
Professor Dr Rosnani Hashim for giving me the opportunity to pursue my doctorate at
INSTED.
I would also like to thank the Deputy Dean of Postgraduate and Research,
Associate Professor Dr Ismaiel Hassanein A. Mohamed for his support and
encouragement.
I would like to convey my thanks to Dr Mohyani Razikin, Dr Ismail Sheikh
Ahmad and Allahyarham Dr Ahmad Marzuki for their guidance.
I would like to thank the staff at the Institute of Education and the Centre for
Post-Graduate Studies for their assistance and support.
I would also like to thank Universiti Tunku Abdul Rahman for providing me
with the encouragement to complete this journey.
Lastly, I wish to express my thanks to my students who have provided me with
inspiration.
x
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Abstract ................................................................................................................... ii
Abstract in Arabic ................................................................................................... iii
Approval Page ......................................................................................................... iv
Declaration .............................................................................................................. v
Copyright Page ........................................................................................................ vi
Dedication ............................................................................................................... vii
Acknowledgements ................................................................................................. viii
List of Tables .......................................................................................................... xiii
List of Figure ........................................................................................................... xiv
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION ................................................................ 1 Metacognition and Vocabulary Learning .................................................... 3
Motivation in vocabulary learning .............................................................. 6 Vocabulary learning strategies .................................................................... 8 Statement of the Problem ............................................................................ 10
Significance of Research ............................................................................. 11 Research Objectives .................................................................................... 11 Research Questions ..................................................................................... 11
Research Hypotheses .................................................................................. 12 Delimitations of the Study .......................................................................... 12
The Proposed Model ................................................................................... 12 Conceptual and Operational Definition of Terms ....................................... 14
Vocabulary learning strategies ............................................................. 14
Metacognition ...................................................................................... 15
Motivation ............................................................................................ 16 Chapter Summary ........................................................................................ 18
CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW ................................................... 19 Part 1: Metacognition ................................................................................. 19
Measuring and Assessing Metacognition............................................. 25 Metacognition and Vocabulary Learning............................................. 29
Part 2: Motivation ...................................................................................... 33 The Socio-Educational Model............................................................. 36
The Self-Determination Theory ........................................................... 37 Goal Theory ......................................................................................... 40 Self-Efficacy ........................................................................................ 41
Motivation and Vocabulary Development ........................................... 44 Part 3: Vocabulary Acquisition in Language Learning. .............................. 48
The Mental Lexicon ............................................................................. 49 The Bilingual Mental Lexicon ............................................................. 52
Vocabulary Learning ............................................................................ 54 Taxonomies of Vocabulary Learning Strategies .................................. 56 Vocabulary Acquisition and Working Memory ................................... 58 Studies of Vocabulary Learning Strategy Use ..................................... 60
xi
Studies That Report A Negative Relationship Between Strategy Use
And Language Achievement ................................................................ 70 Possible Reasons for the Contradiction in Findings ............................ 77
The Impact of Learners’ Culture on Language Strategy Use .............. 79 Limitations in Research on Vocabulary Learning Strategy Use .......... 81
Gaps in the Literature .................................................................................. 85 Theoretical Framework ............................................................................... 85
Hypothesised Model ............................................................................ 85
Chapter Summary ........................................................................................ 86
CHAPTER THREE: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY .................................. 88 Research Design .......................................................................................... 88 Population ................................................................................................... 88
Sampling ..................................................................................................... 89
Respondents of the study ............................................................................ 89
Tertiary-level English courses ..................................................................... 90 Proficiency .................................................................................................. 92 Instruments .................................................................................................. 93 The pilot study ............................................................................................. 93
Reliability and Validity ............................................................................... 96 Reliability ............................................................................................. 96
1. Vocabulary Learning Strategies Questionnaire ............................... 97 The Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ): ......... 101 Motivation ............................................................................................ 101
Metacognition ...................................................................................... 103 Validity ................................................................................................. 107
Analysis of Main Study ............................................................................... 107
Descriptive and reliability analysis ...................................................... 107
Structural Equation Modelling ............................................................. 108 Justification for using Structural Equation Modeling .......................... 108
Steps in Conducting Sem ............................................................................ 109
Data Screening ............................................................................................ 110
Accuracy of data input ......................................................................... 111 Missing data ......................................................................................... 111 Assessment of Normality ..................................................................... 111
Univariate and Multivariate Outliers .......................................................... 113 Multicollinearity and Singularity ................................................................ 114
Linearity ...................................................................................................... 114 Chapter Summary ........................................................................................ 115
CHAPTER FOUR: DATA ANALYSIS ............................................................. 116 Descriptive Statistics ................................................................................... 116 Using Structural Equation Modelling in Hypothesis Testing ..................... 119 The Hypothesised Model ............................................................................ 120
Model Analysis ........................................................................................... 121 Confirmatory Factor Analysis ..................................................................... 122
Assessing Model Fit ............................................................................. 122 Reporting Fit Indices ............................................................................ 124 Vocabulary Learning Strategy Use ...................................................... 125
xii
Metacognition ...................................................................................... 131
Motivation ............................................................................................ 135 Discussion of the research questions ........................................................... 139
Conclusion on Findings on Research Questions 1, 2 & 3 ........................... 141 Model Estimation ........................................................................................ 141 Research Hypotheses .................................................................................. 142 The Structural Model of how Metacognition and Motivation Influence
Vocabulary Learning Strategy Use ............................................................. 143
The full structural model ...................................................................... 143
Conclusion ................................................................................................... 144
CHAPTER FIVE: CONCLUSION .................................................................... 146 Discussion on findings ................................................................................ 146
Mobile-assisted language learning .............................................................. 152
Results of the hypotheses ............................................................................ 154
Discussion on findings of hypotheses ......................................................... 156 Implications of findings .............................................................................. 157 Conclusion ................................................................................................... 159
BIBLIOGRAPHY ................................................................................................. 160
APPENDIX I: MOTIVATED STRATEGIES FOR LEARNING
QUESTIONNAIRE: METACOGNITION SCALE ................................................ 184
APPENDIX II: MOTIVATED STRATEGIES FOR LEARNING
QUESTIONNAIRE: MOTIVATION SCALE ........................................................ 187
APPENDIX III: VOCABULARY LEARNING STRATEGY USE
QUESTIONNAIRE ................................................................................................. 190
xiii
LIST OF TABLES
Table No. Page No.
2.1 The differences between metacognitive learners and non-
metacognitive learners (Martinez, 2006) 24
3.1 Distribution according to gender 90
3.2 Distribution according to proficiency 92
3.3 Reliability analysis for Vocabulary Learning Strategy Use 100
3.4 Reliability analysis for Motivation scale 103
3.5 Reliability analysis for Metacognition scale 106
3.6 Summary of skewness and kurtosis for measured variables 112
3.7 Summary of the instruments, constructs and number of items 115
4.1 Item Distribution of Guessing, Dictionary, Memory, Activation,
Planning, Monitoring, Problem-solving, Intrinsic, Extrinsic and
Control of Learning Beliefs 117
4.2 Construct Validity for the Vocabulary Learning Strategies
Questionnaire 128
4.3 Maximum Likelihood Parameter Estimates of the Standardized Factor
Loadings, Standard Error, Critical Ratio and Squared Multiple
Correlations for Vocabulary Learning Strategies 129
4.4 Construct Validity for the Motivated Strategies for Learning
(Metacognition) Questionnaire 133
4.5 Maximum Likelihood Parameter Estimates of the Standardized Factor
Loadings, Standard Error, Critical Ratio and Squared Multiple
Correlations for Metacognition 134
4.6 Construct Validity for the Motivated Strategies for Learning
(Motivation) Questionnaire 137
4.7 Maximum Likelihood Parameter Estimates of the Standardized Factor
Loadings, Standard Error, Critical Ratio and Squared Multiple
Correlations for Motivation 138
xiv
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure No. Page No.
1.1 Proposed model depicting how motivation and metacognition
influence the usage of vocabulary learning strategy use 13
2.1 Orientation subtypes along the self-determined continuum (adapted
from Deci and Ryan, 2000). 39
2.2 The phonological loop (Baddeley and Hitch, 2001). 59
2.3 The Causal Model (Gardner, Tremblay and Masgoret (1997). 72
2.4 Proposed model depicting how motivation and metacognition
determine the usage of vocabulary learning strategy use 86
3.1 Normal p-plot 115
4.1 Proposed model depicting how motivation and metacognition
determines the usage of vocabulary learning strategy use 121
4.2 Measurement Model for Vocabulary Strategy Use 127
4.3 First Order CFA for Vocabulary Strategy Use 130
4.4 Measurement Model of Metacognition 132
4.5 First Order CFA for Metacognition 134
4.6 Measurement Model for Motivation 137
4.7 First order CFA for Motivation 138
4.8 Structural model depicting how metacognition and motivation
influence vocabulary learning strategy use. 142
4.9 Structural model depicting how metacognition and motivation
influence vocabulary learning strategy use. 144
5.1 Revised model depicting how motivation and metacognition influence
the usage of vocabulary learning strategy use 155
1
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
Vocabulary acquisition is central to language development for ESL learners,
especially in ESP environments where learners are expected to master certain
vocabulary items and language structures for specific use in technical fields such as
engineering. At the heart of vocabulary acquisition is vocabulary knowledge, which is
seen as a determiner to learners’ reading and comprehension of texts (Nassaji, 2004).
Similarly, vocabulary size has often been cited as a predictor of reading success (Qian,
2002), meaning that learners with more vocabulary knowledge of high-frequency
words would have better reading comprehension skills than learners with limited
vocabulary knowledge.
Improving vocabulary knowledge could greatly improve one’s English
proficiency and the issue of improving English proficiency has always been a focus
among Malaysian teachers, academics, and Ministry of Education officials (Mohd
Asraf, 2003). Students' lack of proficiency in English could
“potentially limit their future educational and career opportunities, compared to those
who are able to use the language well” and rural students face an even bigger
challenge as “the failure rate in national standardized English examinations is twice
that of their urban counterparts” (Mohd Asraf, 2004). Many rural school students have
difficulty using English in simple conversation, or understanding the most basic
information in a reading passage.
It was found in The Development of Education National Report (2004) that the
exposure to practice during English lessons which constituted only 3 and a half hours
2
per week was still insufficient to upgrade the proficiency to the desired level. Worse
still, the lack of English proficiency was having alarming repercussions on the job
market and the national economy, as these students found it difficult to obtain jobs
after graduation. This was not due to a lack of available jobs, but rather a mismatch
between workforce requirements and graduates’ skill sets. It was reported that
“graduates were unable to communicate effectively in English and that this was a
problem that needed to be addressed immediately” (The Development of Education
National Report, 2004).
In Malaysian universities, improving English language proficiency has always
been a fundamental part of the learning process. Is compulsory for learners to attend
English courses that are specifically designed to help them improve their language
skills for the field that they are pursuing (Lee, 2004).
However, some learners still show slow progress in improving their reading
comprehension. One of the biggest concerns cited by students is having a “weak
vocabulary”, which impedes their reading and understanding of texts (Qian, 1998).
This deficit can be seen clearly during reading comprehension activities which require
them to paraphrase highlighted words and phrases, as well as answering
comprehension questions which require higher order skills such as synthesis of ideas
(Laufer, 1997; Qian, 1998, 1999). Weak students often cite limited vocabulary and
weak grammar knowledge as the main factors that impede their learning development
in English (Qian, 1998). This handicap overrides factors such as knowledge of text
structure and understanding subtle nuances of language when reading more
sophisticated texts (Fauziah, 2003). The outcome of this problem is that students then
feel demotivated in their vocabulary learning.
3
METACOGNITION AND VOCABULARY LEARNING
Metacognition refers to the state of knowing and controlling the cognitive processes
that are utilized in performing a task. More recently, the term "metacognitive
approach" has been applied to strategy training aimed at teaching EFL students
consciously to control and manage their own learning and to analyze the different
stages of a task in order to choose appropriate problem-solving strategies (Robbins,
2002).
Vocabulary learning is subsumed under language learning strategies, which
in turn form part of general learning strategies (Nation, 2001). Students with greater
autonomy in their learning generally take more responsibility for their own learning
and exhibit more confidence, involvement and proficiency (Oxford, 1990). In the
case of vocabulary learning, it has been found that learners who are more self-directed
tend to use more metacognitive strategies effectively, resulting in greater success in
learning vocabulary.
Anderson (2002) proposed five main components for metacognition. They
include: 1) preparing and planning for learning, 2) selecting and using learning
strategies, 3) monitoring strategy use, 4) orchestrating various strategies, and 5)
evaluating strategy use and learning.
Planning refers to “the act of thinking about how one will approach a given
task”. It involves coming up with personal goals and a list of strategies to enable them
to achieve these goals. Monitoring refers to “the act of consciously focusing one’s
attention on the task, using one’s social skills to work collaboratively with others to
help regulate learning”. Problem-solving means “using any resource available to
overcome a difficulty in the learning process, whether it comes from within
themselves, through reference materials or from another person”, while Evaluating
4
means “assessing if learning goals were met, and if not; why did they not meet those
goals and how can they do it differently next time” (in Chamot et al., 1999).
In the context of the language learning classroom, these four strategies are
very useful in improving vocabulary learning. Metacognitive awareness is
instrumental to successful learning in that it helps the learners regulate their
application of various learning strategies. The four strategies, namely planning,
monitoring, problem-solving and evaluation serve as a framework upon which they
can embark on a more structured learning approach. For example, in a lesson where
the learning outcome is to expose learners to scientific vocabulary related to
mechanical engineering - the learners can plan their vocabulary learning through
metacognitive strategies such as directing attention and activating background
knowledge; and monitor their development through note-taking and peer coaching.
Should any problems arise, such as the learners encountering difficult and
unknown words in a text, they can fall back on problem-solving strategies such as
inference and substitution. They can then evaluate their progress by judging both how
well they learned the new words and whether or not the strategy used was the right
one. Any confusion regarding the meaning of the word or the use of the word in
various contexts would be noted in the evaluation stage and the learner would then go
back to adjust their learning strategy.
As these four strategies of Planning, Monitoring, Problem-solving and
Evaluating segue from one to the other, it is important to note that metacognition
serves as the unifying element that ensures the successful implementation of these
strategies. Metacognition refers to the condition of having executive control over
one’s cognitive processes, and being aware of one’s thinking as one performs a
specific task and then using this awareness to control what one is doing (Robbins,
5
2002). It can also be seen as a higher order thinking which involves active control
over the cognitive processes engaged in learning (Livingston, 1997).
Initially, metacognition was described as the active monitoring and consequent
regulation and orchestration of cognitive processes, usually in the service of some
concrete goal or objective (Flavell, 1979; in Fogarty, 1994). According to Flavell
(1979, 1987), metacognition consists of both metacognitive knowledge and
metacognitive experiences or regulation. Metacognitive knowledge refers to “acquired
knowledge about cognitive processes, or knowledge that can be used to control
cognitive processes”. Flavell further divides metacognitive knowledge into three
categories: knowledge of person variables, task variables and strategy variables
(Flavell, 1979, p. 906).
Knowledge of person variables refers to how we learn and process
information, as well as knowing of one's own learning processes. Knowledge of task
variables include knowledge about the nature of the task and identifying what kind of
processing demands will be required. Finally, knowledge about strategy variables
include knowledge about both cognitive and metacognitive strategies, as well as
conditional knowledge about the application of such strategies (Livingston, 1997).
Metacognitive experiences on the other hand involve the use of metacognitive
strategies or metacognitive regulation (Brown, 1987).
Activities such as planning how to approach a given learning task such as
vocabulary learning, monitoring the learning of new words, and evaluating progress
toward the completion of a vocabulary or reading task can be considered
metacognitive in nature. The primary thrust of metacognition lies in effective strategy
use, and conversely learners who do not apply the strategies correctly would continue
to face learning difficulties. . The significance of effective metacognitive strategy use
6
has been identified by O’Malley, Chamot, Stewner-Mazanares, Russo and Kupper
(1985), in Rasekh and Ranjbary (2003); who likened learners without metacognitive
approaches as “being learners without direction or opportunity to review their
progress, accomplishment and future direction”. Thus, effective vocabulary
learning is dependent upon successful deployment of the right metacognitive
strategies. However, motivation is another factor that contributes to this equation.
MOTIVATION IN VOCABULARY LEARNING
Learners who fail to develop good word recognition skills early in their learning begin
to dislike reading and hence avoid reading wherever possible. This lack of practice
can in turn further inhibit their growth in reading (Juel, 1988; Stanovich, 1994). As a
result, emotional problems resulting from repeated failure can lead to attitudes of
"learned helplessness" whereby students give up trying and so “perpetuate the failure
cycle” (Borkowski, Carr, Relinger, & Pressley, 1990; Paris & Winograd, 1990; in
Bruce, 2000).
This situation underscores how weak readers' problems with word
identification may reflect deficiencies in the metacognitive abilities (Spedding and
Chan, 1994). It was reported that “poor readers were found to be inferior in
metacognitive abilities involving the use of orthographic cues, morphological cues
and context cues… (they were also) less strategic than average readers in using these
cues and were often unaware of the strategies they did use” (Bruce, 2000).
Furthermore, weaker language learners can sometimes find it hard to catch up with
their more advanced classmates and this can lead to a build-up of frustration and poor
motivation to learn.
7
Having a strong motivation to succeed in language learning goals is considered
just as important as having the language aptitude for the successful acquisition of the
target language (Noels, 2001). Students with strong motivation are most successful
when learning a target language, and are usually those who have “positive feelings
about the language, the culture and who have a desire to become familiar with or even
integrate into the society in which the language is used” (Gardner et al., 2002). In the
context of learning English in a university, good students are those who have excellent
communication skills in English, and so learners who have high motivation are those
who wish to be considered as having good skills in writing, speaking, listening and
reading in English.
Motivation can be defined in many different ways. Brown saw motivation as
“the extent to which you make choices a goal to pursue and the effort you will devote
to the pursuit” (1994). Gardner claimed that motivation was “effort plus desire to
achieve the goal of learning the language plus favorable attitudes towards learning the
language” (1985). Motivation can also be viewed as a function of a person’s thought
and Dornyei and Otto have defined it as the dynamically changing cumulative aroused
in a person that initiates, directs, coordinates, amplifies, terminates and evaluates the
cognitive and the motor processes whereby initial wishes and desires are selected,
prioritized, operationalized and acted out (Dornyei et al., 2005). Thus, motivation
can be seen as a culmination of both having a goal, as well as the efforts taken to
attain it.
However, up to the present there can be said to be a lack of research looking
into motivation and vocabulary development. Previously, the emphasis in research on
academic motivation and vocabulary learning was very rare, as there was “a greater
emphasis on research on general motivation and motivation for reading” (Wigfield &
8
Usher, 1984; Guthrie & Wigfield, 2000). This is ironic, as although it is
acknowledged that the effectiveness of vocabulary development is dependent on
effective vocabulary learning (Kamil & Hiebert, 2005), the relationship of motivation
on vocabulary learning was not given due emphasis. This could be due to the notion
that
VOCABULARY LEARNING STRATEGIES
Vocabulary learning strategies are a crucial part of language learning strategies
(Nation, 2001) and refers to knowledge about what students do to find out the
meaning of new words, retain them in long-term memory, recall them when needed in
comprehension, and use them in language production (Catalan, 2003, cited in
Ruutmets, 2005). Vocabulary learning strategies can foster increased autonomy for
learners, who as a result become more independent, capable of taking on more
responsibility for their own learning, involvement and proficiency (Oxford, 1990).
Successful vocabulary learning can be enhanced when the learner’s attention is
directed consciously to vocabulary items or strategies (Coady, 1997; Oxford and
Scarcella, 1994; and Nation, 2001). There have been many attempts to capture the
dimensions in vocabulary learning in vocabulary learning taxonomies, all of which
shall be discussed in detail in Chapter 2. However, the theoretical basis of vocabulary
learning strategies for this study shall be the Vocabulary Learning Strategies
Taxonomy as outlined by Schmitt (1997).
Schmitt proposed that there are 2 major clusters of strategies that learners use
when learning words for the very first time (Schmitt, 1997). The first strategy is what
9
happens when the learner first identifies the meaning of new words, and the second
strategy is when the learners consolidate the meaning of the word learned. The first
cluster of strategies includes determination and social strategies, while the second
cluster includes social, memory, cognitive and metacognitive strategies. This
taxonomy is largely based on Oxford’s classification of learner strategies (Oxford,
1990).
Determination strategies are used when learners “have to discover the meaning
of a new word without the benefit of an instructor present to provide assistance”
(Schmitt, 1997, p.18). Social strategies are used when learners “ask someone for help
with the meaning, implying that they have do have access to someone who can help”
(Schmitt, 1997, p.18). Memory strategies are used “when learners try to relate new
materials to existing knowledge”, while Cognitive strategies are “attempts by the
learners to manipulate or transform the target language in an attempt to decipher
meaning” (Schmitt, 1997, p.18). Finally metacognitive strategies are “a conscious
overview of the learning process and making decisions about planning, monitoring
and evaluating how to learn new words” (Schmitt, 1997, p.18).
However, it must be noted that Schmitt’s taxonomy here implies that learning
new words seems mostly to occur in a linear fashion – students learn a word, try to use
a variety of strategies to remember the form and meaning, and move on to the next
word. During lessons, instructors are encouraged to repeat the new word, so that
learners may benefit from this repeated exposure. In the context of an ESP classroom,
learners would need to harness all the vocabulary learning strategies in order to learn
more effectively and perform sufficiently well in their respective courses. Thus it is
necessary for learners to know that successful deployment of metacognitive strategies
is essential if they wish to perform better in vocabulary learning.
10
It has now been established that metacognition, motivation and vocabulary
learning strategy use are connected together in the process of vocabulary learning and
development. However, here are very few researches that look into the structure of
metacognition, motivation and vocabulary learning strategy use; and even fewer that
study how these factors relate with each other. Most of the researches only looked at
reading proficiency as a general construct and neglected to look into the more specific
aspects, such as vocabulary knowledge (Grabe, 2002; Sheorey and Mokhtari, 2001).
The limited research that currently exists assumed that successful vocabulary learning
strategy use will result in better vocabulary knowledge. However, few studies exist
that look into the interplay among metacognition, motivation and vocabulary learning
strategy use.
STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM
Following from the gap in the research, it is identified that there is a lack of
understanding on what are the structures of metacognition, motivation and vocabulary
learning strategy use. Although studies have researched the taxonomies of all 3
constructs and their related sub-constructs, it does not necessarily mean that the
identified sub-constructs will hold true across different educational settings. For
instance, do Science students have the same structure of the metacognition construct
as do Arts students? Does this hold true for motivation and vocabulary learning
strategy use as well? How does metacognition, motivation and vocabulary learning
strategy use relate to each other during the process of vocabulary learning?
It is these questions that this study will address, and it is hoped that by looking
into the structures of metacognition, motivation and vocabulary learning strategy use
