593885

research-article2015
TRE0010.1177/1477878515593885Theory and Research in EducationMuñoz and Ramirez

Article
TRE
Theory and Research in Education

Teachers’ conceptions of
2015, Vol. 13(2) 198­–220
© The Author(s) 2015
Reprints and permissions:
motivation and motivating sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/1477878515593885
practices in second-language tre.sagepub.com

learning: A self-determination
theory perspective

Ana Muñoz and Marta Ramirez

Universidad EAFIT, Colombia

Abstract
Based on self-determination theory, we conducted an exploratory study aimed at identifying
teachers’ beliefs about motivation and motivating practices in second-language teaching at a
private language center in Medellin, Colombia. To gather data, 65 teachers were surveyed; from
this initial group, 11 were interviewed and observed in class during 2012. The results show that
teachers’ potential to promote motivation is mostly centered on relatedness and that while
teachers recognize the positive and beneficial effects of promoting autonomy and competence,
their teaching practices do not evidence those beliefs. Based on the results, we conclude that in
order to promote autonomy and competence, it is important, first of all, to establish the right
social conditions, i.e. meaningful teacher-student relationships.

Keywords
Autonomy, competence, motivation, relatedness, self-determination, teaching

Introduction
It is a known fact that motivation is a relevant factor in any learning–teaching process.
As Zoltan Dörnyei (2005) emphasized, ‘without sufficient motivation, even students
with the most remarkable abilities cannot accomplish long-term goals, and neither are
appropriate curricula and good teaching enough to ensure student achievement’ (p. 65).
Specifically, motivation to learn a second language (L2) becomes critical in situations
where the source of motivation is not intrinsic, but responds more to external aspects

Corresponding author:
Ana Muñoz, Carrera 49 7Sur-50, Universidad EAFIT, Medellín, Colombia.
Email: apmunoz@eafit.edu.co

Downloaded from tre.sagepub.com at UNIV NEBRASKA LIBRARIES on October 21, 2015

Muñoz and Ramirez 199

such as graduation, employment opportunities, traveling, and government mandates.

However, other external sources of motivation, including family members, peers,
teachers, and members of the L2 community, can help an externally motivated student
move toward a more intrinsic motivation. Of particular relevance to this research is the
influence of the teacher and her teaching practices on motivating students.
To investigate motivation at the language center (LC), Medellin, we adopted one of the
most recent and widespread theories of motivation, self-determination theory (SDT; Deci
and Ryan, 1985; Ryan and Deci, 2000a), as a conceptual framework to guide our research.
SDT posits, ‘When students’ basic psychological needs for autonomy, competence and
relatedness are supported in the classroom, they are more likely to internalize their moti-
vation to learn and to be more autonomously engaged in their studies’ (Niemiec and Ryan,
2009: 139). Based on this idea, we set out to explore what beliefs and teaching practices
were used to motivate students and what aspects of the SDT constructs (autonomy, com-
petence, and relatedness) were taken into consideration within these practices.

Research questions
Our research questions were, thus the following:

What are teachers’ conceptions regarding student motivation?

What are teachers’ motivating practices?

Literature review
Defining motivation
There are many ways to conceptualize motivation. Past theories of motivation focused
on biological instincts, drives, and arousal. Current theories of motivation, such as self-
determination, achievement goal, and expectancy–value theories, predominantly exam-
ine cognitive and social processes that influence motivation. Despite efforts of various
approaches to define motivation, a single approach has been unable to capture its com-
plexities. This is why most studies done in the fields of psychology, education, and L2
acquisition acknowledge that it is not easy to determine what aspects or variables are
implicated in the definition of motivation. The task becomes even more difficult since
the mastering of a L2 is different from other school subjects because it is also bound by
cultural, personal, and social factors (Dörnyei, 2001).
Despite the lack of consensus regarding the variables involved in L2 learning motiva-
tion, different theoretical models have addressed this issue: Gardner’s (2001) socio-
educational model of L2 acquisition, Dörnyei’s (1994) and Dörnyei and Otto’s (1998)
process model of L2 motivation, and Deci and Ryan’s (1985, 2000) SDT.
Self-determination theory has been elaborated by Deci and Ryan (1985, 2000) and
further refined by different scholars (Niemiec and Ryan, 2009; Noels et al., 2000) and
successfully applied in different fields such as sports, medicine, coaching, and education.
SDT makes the distinction between intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. When people are
intrinsically motivated, they freely choose to participate in an activity because they view

Downloaded from tre.sagepub.com at UNIV NEBRASKA LIBRARIES on October 21, 2015

200 Theory and Research in Education 13(2)

it as interesting, useful, or fun. Although intrinsic motivation is not the only form of
motivation or self-determined behavior, SDT considers this type of motivation as perva-
sive and important in all humans: ‘From birth onward, humans in their healthiest states
are active, inquisitive, curious and playful creatures displaying ubiquitous readiness to
learn and explore and they do not require extraneous incentives to do so’ (Ryan and Deci,
2000a: 56). This natural form of motivation is considered by SDT as the most highly
self-determined type of motivation.
Extrinsic motivation refers to any type of motivational orientation that is not regulated
by the pleasure of engaging in the challenging and competence-building activity per se,
but rather by factors external to the activity, such as money and promotions. According to
SDT, these types of extrinsic motivators tend to decrease intrinsic motivation when used
to control behavior. However, SDT claims that it is possible to lead an extrinsically moti-
vated person to a more intrinsically motivated behavior. This process is referred to as
internalization (Ryan et al., 1985). According to Niemiec and Ryan (2009), ‘the internali-
zation of extrinsic motivation is essential for students’ self-initiation and maintained voli-
tion for educational activities that are not inherently interesting or enjoyable’ (p. 138).
Furthermore, within SDT, Deci and Ryan (1985) identified different types of extrinsic
motivation: external, introjected, identified, and integrated. When an individual acts
guided by external motives, tangible rewards are very important. If a person behaves in
order to comply with a requirement, to avoid guilt or anxiety, introjected motivation
guides the behavior. If an individual understands and accepts the benefit of something,
identified motivation is present, that is, the person identifies with the behavior. Finally,
integration occurs when identified regulations are fully assimilated with the individual’s
remaining values, needs, and identity.
SDT maintains that in order to move from an external motivation (extrinsic) to a more
integrated motivation (intrinsic), it is necessary to address three basic psychological
needs innately present in human beings: autonomy, competence, and relatedness. The
need for autonomy refers to the experience of behavior as volitional and reflectively self-
endorsed. For example, students are autonomous when they willingly devote time and
energy to their studies. The need for competence refers to the experience of behavior as
effectively performed. Students are competent when they feel able to meet the challenges
of their school work. Relatedness is associated with a student feeling that the teacher
genuinely likes, respects, and values him or her. (See a more detailed definition of each
construct below.) When these needs are taken into consideration and supported in the
classroom, students are more likely to internalize their motivation to learn and to be more
autonomously engaged in their studies (Reeve et al., 2004; Ryan and Connell, 1989).
We chose this theory over other theories or models because SDT explicitly contends
that the three psychological needs are ‘universal’, that is, they are vital to all people’s
well-functioning. In this sense, satisfaction of these needs should yield positive out-
comes in all cultures. Another reason to work with the SDT model is that it emphasizes
the teachers’ responsibility in promoting students’ motivation. Furthermore, it also con-
siders motivation not only within a quantitative perspective (‘very motivated’, ‘little
motivated’, ‘not motivated’) but also contemplates different types of motivation, which
allow the teacher to better guide students according to the type of motivation that they
exhibit. Finally, the underlying philosophy of SDT is well in accordance with the

Downloaded from tre.sagepub.com at UNIV NEBRASKA LIBRARIES on October 21, 2015

Muñoz and Ramirez 201

philosophy of teaching and learning of the LC that believes in the positive potential of
human nature, ‘the inherent tendency to seek out novelty and challenges, and to extend
and exercise one’s capacity to explore and to learn’ (Ryan and Deci, 2000b: 70).

Teacher influence on student motivation

It has been argued that both teachers’ instructional and interpersonal styles influence
student motivation (Jang et al., 2010; Reeve, 2006; Skinner et al., 2008). An important
aspect of teaching style is structure which refers to the teacher’s provision of clear and
detailed expectations and instructions, guidance, scaffolding, and constructive feedback
(Jang et al., 2010: 598). Empirical research has confirmed that students with structured
teachers perform better than students with unstructured teachers (Brophy, 2006; Evertson
and Weinstein, 2006) and demonstrate more classroom engagement (Skinner and
Belmont, 1993; Tucker et al., 2002).
In addition to clearly structuring the class, teachers’ interpersonal style – the way they
communicate and relate to students – also affects student motivation. Teachers’ interper-
sonal style has thus been placed on a continuum that ranges from highly controlling to
highly autonomy-supportive (Deci et al., 1981). A controlling teacher is characterized by
behaviors such as providing solutions and answers before students have enough time to
work on problems and tasks independently, using external rewards to pressure students
to comply with the classroom agendas, comparing students (grades, behaviors, effort,
performance, etc.), encouraging competition among students, and using controlling and
coercive language. In contrast, SDT researchers have identified autonomy-supportive
teachers as providing choices, using non-controlling language and directives, explaining
the utility and benefit of tasks, being responsive and empathic, acknowledging students’
negative feelings, listening actively, encouraging effort and persistence, among others.
For instance, research by Reeve et al. (2002) showed that students learning Chinese
who were given autonomy-support through provision of a rationale identified with the
value of the tasks and showed more effort than students who were not given a rationale.
Likewise, Assor et al. (2002) found that autonomy-supportive teacher behaviors, such as
helping students understand the relevance of tasks, were important predictors of engage-
ment in schoolwork. In another study, Deci et al. (1994) asked college students to per-
form a boring task. They presented the tasks providing a rationale, acknowledging
students’ negative feelings, and using non-controlling language. The results suggested
positive effects on intrinsic motivation.
To conclude, although the link between teacher instructional/interpersonal style and
student motivation has been given some attention, few studies have been done in L2
acquisition, and none, to our knowledge, in a Latin American context. This research rep-
resents a first step in trying to establish how teachers’ beliefs about motivation and moti-
vating practices in L2 learning are reflected in their teaching and interpersonal styles.

Method and procedure

Although SDT research tradition has mainly adopted quantitative methods, we used a
qualitative approach due to the nature of our research. Being an exploratory study, we

Downloaded from tre.sagepub.com at UNIV NEBRASKA LIBRARIES on October 21, 2015

202 Theory and Research in Education 13(2)

were mainly interested in uncovering teachers’ beliefs based on their experiences.

Qualitative techniques are more useful in these situations and are fundamentally appro-
priate for finding the meanings that teachers place on the events, processes, and struc-
tures of their lives (Van Manen, 1977). In fact, SDT is sympathetic with qualitative
methods. According to Ryan and Deci (2000b), ‘it is the individual meaning or experi-
ence that has functional significance in behavioral events’ (cited in Ryan and Niemiec,
2009: 267).
This study began by identifying and defining the specific behaviors that we wanted to
examine within autonomy, competence, and relatedness. A summarized version of each
definition is presented in the following sections.

Autonomy
Autonomy involves ‘being volitional, acting from one’s integrated sense of self, and
endorsing one’s actions. It does not entail being separate from, not relying upon, or being
independent of others’ (Deci and Ryan, 2000: 242). In language learning, autonomy-
supportive teaching practices are desirable in order to enhance student internalization of
motivation, facilitate learning, and maximize the chances for success. SDT has identified
autonomy-supportive teaching behaviors. These include the following: giving students
opportunities to make choices about different aspects of the class, avoiding the use of
controlling language and directives (‘you should’, ‘you must’, ‘you have to’, etc.),
acknowledging students’ negative feelings, and providing a meaningful rationale for
why a learning activity is valuable and useful. These teacher behaviors have been shown
to enhance students’ autonomy and even develop classroom engagement, creativity, and
well-being (Black and Deci, 2000; Hardré and Reeve, 2003; Levesque et al., 2004).
Moreover, according to Reeve et al. (2004), autonomy-supportive teachers create class-
room conditions in which learners can be guided by their own inner motives to learn.
Two important autonomy-supportive practices described in the literature are provid-
ing choice and rationale. First, it has been argued that providing choice or decision-
making opportunities on tasks that students perceive as relevant to their goals and
interests contributes to students experiencing autonomy in learning (Assor et al., 2002;
Ryan et al., 1985). Giving students control over the process or the product of a task fos-
ters a belief in personal control, promotes self-determination, and enhances intrinsic
motivation (Deci et al., 1991; Lepper and Hodell, 1989). Second, explaining the impor-
tance of a learning activity facilitates students’ internalization of academic motivation,
which in turn is associated with students’ greater effort to learn (Reeve et al., 2002).
Research also indicates that when students recognize the value, utility, or interest of an
activity, they can be more easily engaged in the activity, persist in it, and even understand
what they are trying to learn (Miller and Brickman, 2004; Vansteenkiste et al., 2005).

Competence
Competence is the belief that one is able to accomplish a task effectively. Students need
to feel confident that they have the ability to perform a task before they begin doing it. In
other words, they need to see that success is possible. As Crow (2007) argued, ‘it is

Downloaded from tre.sagepub.com at UNIV NEBRASKA LIBRARIES on October 21, 2015

Muñoz and Ramirez 203

possible that students may not completely understand how to do a task before they begin,
but they need to have the confidence that the teacher will provide them with individual
support as they develop a task’ (p. 50).
An important strategy to support students’ feelings of competence is providing them
with structure, which refers to the communication of clear, consistent, and reasonable
guidelines (Reeve, 2002). Therefore, in order to help students successfully fulfill a task,
the teacher needs to specify the steps required to complete the task, that is, what students
need to do, step by step, and how they need to do it. By structuring the task in different
steps, the complexity of the task can be reduced, thus increasing successful task comple-
tion (Muñoz et al., 2006). Teachers can also foster a sense of competence by giving stu-
dents positive feedback that emphasizes success and feelings of efficacy (Deci and Ryan,
1980). Diverse studies confirm the effects of positive feedback on student motivation
and feelings of competence. For instance, Deci (1971) showed that, when compared to a
control group that received no positive feedback, undergraduates who received positive
feedback were more intrinsically motivated to make choices and persist in the activities
given. Positive feedback has also been related to students’ perceptions of competence
and intrinsic motivation (Koka and Hein, 2003). Similarly, Ryan and Deci (2009) con-
tended that ‘whereas positive feedback helps maintain feelings of competence, and thus
supports intrinsic motivation, negative feedback, especially when embedded in a con-
trolling context, thwarts people’s sense of competence and undermines their intrinsic
motivation’ (p. 173).
It is important to highlight that positive feedback can have a greater effect on motiva-
tion when it is descriptive, that is, when it is ‘highly specific, directly revealing or highly
descriptive of what actually resulted, clear to the performer, and available or offered in
terms of specific targets and standards’ (Wiggins, 1998: 46). In addition, Henderlong and
Lepper (2002) suggested that positive feedback is more likely to enhance intrinsic moti-
vation when it is perceived as honest by the recipient and if it emphasizes improvement
of learning rather than social comparison.

Relatedness
Relatedness has been defined as the need to feel connected to and valued by others, as
well as the experience of having satisfying and supportive social relationships. SDT
proponents argue that value and support will ultimately establish ‘a sense of warmth,
security, and connection between the learner and other people in the social context’
(Comanaru and Noels, 2009: 135). These elements within value and support also influ-
ence the learning process. Niemiec and Ryan (2009), for example, explained that ‘People
tend to internalize and accept as their own the values and practices of those to whom they
feel, or want to feel, connected, and from contexts in which they experience a sense of
belonging’ (p. 139).
Authority figures are very important in creating this sense of security that is so crucial
for relatedness (Ryan et al., 1994). In the earliest stages, parents (Crow, 2007; Deci and
Ryan, 2000) become the primary authority figures. However, as children grow up and
begin their schooling, teachers (Connell and Wellborn, 1991, cited in Taylor and Ntoumanis,
2009) become a more (and sometimes the most, in the case of L2 learning) influential force

Downloaded from tre.sagepub.com at UNIV NEBRASKA LIBRARIES on October 21, 2015

204 Theory and Research in Education 13(2)

in the process of relatedness. Thus, as Crow (2007) argued, ‘[teachers’] relationship with
all students is important and should be based on seeing every student as an interesting
individual with valuable ideas and abilities and worthy of respect’ (p. 52). Therefore, the
presence of a genuine sense of teacher caring and validation is important in a classroom
environment where relatedness plays a vital role in students’ motivation and emotional
development (Furrer and Skinner, 2003, cited in Crow, 2007). Niemiec and Ryan (2009)
also support the idea that ‘conveying warmth, caring, and respect to students’ are indicators
of relatedness’ (p. 141).
A strong sense of relatedness where students feel ‘respected and cared for by the
teacher is essential for their willingness to accept the proffered classroom values’
(Ryan and Deci, 2000b: 64). Niemiec and Ryan (2009) furthered this argument,
explaining that

Students who report such relatedness are more likely to exhibit identified and integrated
regulation for the arduous tasks involved in learning, whereas those who feel disconnected or
rejected by teachers are more likely to move away from internalization and thus respond only
to external contingencies and controls. (pp. 139–140)

To summarize, autonomy, competence, and relatedness are motivationally important

and can be promoted by specific teacher practices (Deci and Ryan, 2002; Ryan and
Powelson, 1991). Thus, the aim of the research reported in this article was to identify
teachers’ conceptions of motivation and motivating practices in relation to the behaviors
identified within each SDT construct:

•• Autonomy: choice and rationale

•• Competence: clear instructions and positive feedback
•• Relatedness: respect (i.e. kindness, empathy, no insults, sarcasm, or mockery)

Participants
This study was conducted with teachers from the English program for adults at a lan-
guage center in Medellin, Colombia. The program had 89 teachers. Out of these, 65
came to a regular teachers’ meeting where they were briefed about the research pro-
ject and asked to respond to a questionnaire on the topic. From this group, 11 teachers
were chosen to participate in interviews and class observations. These participants
were purposely chosen because they exhibited some of the characteristics of the entire
teacher population at the LC. Specifically, they had diverse educational and language
backgrounds. These were distributed as follows: six language teachers, three business
administrators, and two engineers, with teaching experience between 7 and 14 years,
and three native speakers of English and eight non-native speakers of English, all of
them with a language proficiency level between C1 and C2 of the Common European
Framework of Reference (Council of Europe, 2001). The participants received con-
sent letters explaining the procedure for the interviews and class observations. They
were informed about the purpose of the study and reassured about confidentiality and
anonymity matters.

Downloaded from tre.sagepub.com at UNIV NEBRASKA LIBRARIES on October 21, 2015

Muñoz and Ramirez 205

Data gathering tools

Open-ended questionnaire
This questionnaire was aimed at exploring teachers’ beliefs with respect to motivation
through six yes/no questions, each accompanied by a follow-up question. Aware that a
yes/no format can yield superficial information, teachers were prompted to write a short
narrative explaining their answers (see Appendix 1).
After revising existing surveys (e.g. the motivational strategies – Dörnyei, 1998; the
description of the Problems in Schools (PIS) questionnaire by Deci et al., 1981; the
Perceptions of Student Motivation (PSM) by Hardré et al., 2008), we decided to develop
our own questionnaire because it was the best way to ensure that our particular research
needs were adequately addressed. We used SDT to derive questionnaire items that coor-
dinate with the theory, aiming for a theoretical validation. The questions were piloted
with five teachers who were not participating in the study. As a result of this pilot study,
the wording was revised in several places and some questions were omitted. The ques-
tionnaire provided initial information that was further clarified by interviews and class
observations.

In-depth interviews
Seven open-ended questions aimed at exploring teachers’ opinions about motivation (see
Appendix 2). We designed a semi-structured format that provided depth through probe
questions. In-depth interviews offer researchers the possibility to explore participants’
lived experiences and worldviews (Patton, 1990) through questions and probes that elicit
depth of information. They are also most useful when sensitive topics are being explored.
To validate the instrument, the researchers gathered during several discussion meetings
to revise and adjust the questions, trying to phrase them in such a way that they implicitly
tapped into the SDT constructs, so as not to feed any answers. The questions were piloted
with five teachers who were not participating in the study. Based on their answers and
feedback, we made adjustments to the instrument. Since the interview questions were
derived directly and systematically from the theoretical constructs and variables and
from the answers of teachers, we felt confident that they were demonstrably comprehen-
sive of their responses; in other words that the instrument had construct validity. Once
the instrument was validated, researchers contacted interviewees in order to establish the
schedules for interviews conducted by two of the researchers who had extensive experi-
ence with this type of technique. The interviews lasted between 30 and 45 minutes and
teachers were reminded that they could answer in whichever language they felt more
comfortable (English or Spanish). All the interviews were audio recorded and transcribed
by the researchers.

Observations
These were aimed at confirming answers to questionnaires and interviews with class obser-
vations, since a ‘self-reported motivating style may or may not be actualized during class-
room instruction’ (Reeve et al., 2004: 150). We designed a semi-structured observation

Downloaded from tre.sagepub.com at UNIV NEBRASKA LIBRARIES on October 21, 2015

206 Theory and Research in Education 13(2)

format containing three columns: (1) the behaviors to be observed within each SDT con-
struct, (2) a ‘see it or not’ column for each behavior, and (3) a column for observers to
describe the behaviors and provide their insights about the item observed (see Appendix 3).
Prior to the study, four pilot classroom observations were conducted by two observers who
were external to the study and were trained for this specific task. The pilot observations
served to refine the format and to calibrate observers’ understanding of the behaviors to be
observed. The same 11 teachers who participated in the interview were scheduled for two
observations by the same observers who conducted the pilot. Twenty observations were
effectively conducted because one teacher was unable to continue in the study. The purpose
of the observations was to allow the researchers to identify first-hand interactions between
the teacher and the students and to gain a deeper understanding of the variables under
investigation.
By using three different methods, questionnaire, interview, and observations, to
explore teachers’ beliefs, we wanted to ensure more relibility in the results. This refers to
the triangulation of information, which is a powerful technique that facilitates the valida-
tion of data through cross-verification (Erlandson et al., 1993).

Data analysis
The constructs, autonomy, competence, and relatedness, served as the overarching cate-
gories that guided our analysis. The information obtained from questionnaires, inter-
views, and class observations was analyzed by identifying recurrent behaviors (Bogdan
and Biklen, 1998) that were associated with the SDT categories. The procedure was as
follows: (1) individually, researchers read and reread the data to identify common behav-
iors, (2) the researchers got together to compare their individual analysis in search for
similarities and differences, and (3) researchers reached consensus on the recurrent
observed behaviors and how each of these related to the SDT categories.
We also conducted a frequency count based on both the number of teachers who
responded to a specific interview question or item in the questionnaire and the number of
classroom observations. This, according to Namey et al. (2007), is a better indicator of
overall thematic importance than the number of times a theme or idea is expressed and
categorized.

Results
We will provide an overall discussion of the results by cross-referencing information
obtained from the different data gathering sources. The information will be discussed in
terms of the different motivational constructs contemplated in this research. We will
include parenthetically the number of teachers who responded to a specific question or
item. We will also include some of the answers given by the teachers (T).

Teachers’ views about motivation

All the surveyed and interviewed teachers conceived motivation as the desire and enthu-
siasm with which a person undertakes an activity:

Downloaded from tre.sagepub.com at UNIV NEBRASKA LIBRARIES on October 21, 2015

Muñoz and Ramirez 207

T23: What compels a person to do or obtain something

T35: The vital impulse that moves a person to initiate a specific activity
T44: What encourages a person to pursue or abandon something

These teachers also considered that the concept refers to the teachers’ inner energy,
passion, happiness, and love for teaching that can permeate students’ attitude toward
learning. In this sense, all the surveyed (except one) and interviewed participants stated
that their own enthusiasm toward the topic and teaching in general can trigger similar
behaviors in their students. Many of the teachers used the words ‘contagious’ or ‘mirror’
to exemplify the role of the teacher as a model in the classroom:

T29: A teacher is always a model for the student. If they see a dull teacher who just teaches a
class or develops a topic, they will feel bored and lacking motivation. Teacher should be
‘mirrors’ for their students.

T53: Enthusiasm is a very powerful and contagious attitude. If you feel bored in front of your
students, your class will end up reflecting your mood.

We will now present the results in relation to the three basic concepts that promote
motivation for the SDT model.

Autonomy: Choice
More than half of the surveyed teachers (36) indicated that students feel more motivated
if their personal learning style, interests, and ideas are taken into account. They also
emphasized that promoting decision-making on certain aspects of the class creates a
more interactive learning environment as well as a sense of belonging and trust:

T13: I’ve experienced the change of attitude and motivation when students feel they can give
their opinions and express their likes, dislikes, and also when their personalities are taken into
account.

T40: Allowing certain choices can make a student feel that he is important, that he can
contribute, that he is an active, not a passive player in the ‘game’. It can also make a student
feel that his own learning style is taken into account.

T49: When they feel they’re part of the ‘course design’, they increase their sense of belonging,
their autonomy and thus, their motivation to participate and propose.

In all, 25 of the teachers were more specific about what aspects of the class could be
negotiated with students. These include reaching consensus on follow-up activities and
use of materials. During the interviews, all the teachers agreed that giving students
choices and opportunities to decide on the dates for quizzes and presentations, speaking
and writing topics, work partners, and, in fewer cases, activities related to class content
and rules promotes a better and more engaging classroom environment.

Downloaded from tre.sagepub.com at UNIV NEBRASKA LIBRARIES on October 21, 2015

208 Theory and Research in Education 13(2)

Contrary to what teachers reported in the questionnaires and interviews, 18 of the 20

classes observed showed that choice was limited since the lessons were mostly guided by
the teachers who decided on objectives, rules, content, methodology, materials, assess-
ment possibilities, tasks, and feedback.

Autonomy: Rationale
In all, 31 of the surveyed teachers stated that it was important to raise students’ aware-
ness on the benefits of learning a L2 for their current or future academic and professional
advancement. Likewise, all the teachers interviewed acknowledged the importance of
providing a rationale for better learning and more autonomy.

T3: When students see that English is important for their future, they will study more.

T52: It is important to tell students the reasons for doing certain activities because this might
encourage them to make a bigger effort.

Classroom observations show that in 16 of the 20 classes observed, there was no men-
tion of the utility or benefit of suggested tasks.

Competence: Clarity of instructions

Most of the surveyed teachers (42) agreed on clarity of instructions as a means to foster
competence and motivation. Some of the interviewed teachers (4) also considered that
students’ success in performing a task greatly depends on clarity of instructions, exam-
ples, and explanations:

T1: Students need to understand what they have to do, because even if they have a great English
level if they don’t get it, they won’t do it. So, number 1 is that the task is clear, the instructions
are clear.

T16: Students will understand better when I explain the activity, I write it down, and give
examples . . .

T63: Clear instructions are important because students have more chances of being successful.

In the majority of class observations (14 out of 20), teachers provided clear instruc-
tions by using simple language, rephrasing explanations, or providing examples. Cases
of unclear instructions were those in which the teachers had to repeat several times, no
examples were provided, or the students seemed confused and asked for clarification or
further explanations.

Competence: Positive feedback

The analysis of the questionnaires showed that the majority of teachers (58 out of 20) consid-
ered positive feedback an important aspect to promote students’ sense of accomplishment:

Downloaded from tre.sagepub.com at UNIV NEBRASKA LIBRARIES on October 21, 2015

Muñoz and Ramirez 209

T24: I’ve always thought that it is very important to let students know of their strengths and
weaknesses. I tell them: ‘that’s right’, ‘excellent’, ‘very good!’

T29: I generally show them the positive side of their work because a lot of times they feel self-
conscious, so you have to give them reassurance, give them the confidence to do the task.

T42: I congratulate them on any improvement they had.

All the interviewed teachers agreed that a sense of accomplishment in students can be
promoted by means of praising. In this regard, they use phrases such as ‘great job’,
‘that’s ok’, ‘excellent’, or body gestures (thumbs up, nodding, smiling). The observa-
tions showed that the majority of teachers observed (11) acknowledged or encouraged
students to try to do the activities: ‘great’, ‘fantastic’, ‘come on you can’, and ‘please try’
were some of the expressions teachers used.

Relatedness: Respect
The majority of the surveyed (52) and all the interviewed teachers considered this an
important aspect in fostering learning and motivation. Relatedness was associated with
being polite and respectful to students, promoting positive communication among stu-
dents and with the teacher, and fostering a non-threatening classroom atmosphere (free of
stress and anxiety). Relatedness was also associated with the improvement of learning.

T1: When students feel closer to the teacher things go better for both because the rapport may
encourage them to express their feelings and needs more directly and frankly.

T28: When your students feel comfortable with you as a person, their stress levels are at the
lowest point, which allows learning to take place easily.

T31: It is important to create a positive and comfortable atmosphere where students are not
afraid to express themselves.

T37: . . . it makes them feel relaxed and comfortable enough to talk, make mistakes, and
explore without feeling embarrassed.

The observations showed that in almost all the classes (17), respectful behavior
between teachers and students was indeed displayed. For instance, teachers addressed
their students with kindness and empathy. No aggressiveness, insults, sarcasm, or threats
were observed. The majority of teachers surveyed (39) and interviewed (7) clarified,
however, that a good relationship with students was important as long as it was not con-
fused with friendship.

Teachers’ views about motivating practices

All the interviewed and the majority of surveyed (56) teachers agreed that the most
important factor in motivating students to learn English was the teachers’ ability to relate

Downloaded from tre.sagepub.com at UNIV NEBRASKA LIBRARIES on October 21, 2015

210 Theory and Research in Education 13(2)

to students, that is, the ability to be empathic and respectful as well as to create a non-
threatening classroom environment. This emotional connection is the first step, accord-
ing to teachers, toward a more motivating learning experience.

T54: Throughout my experience in teaching I’ve come to learn that if there is no rapport with
students, language acquisition is not as high as we’d like it to be.

T22: I believe that if students have a good relationship with the teacher, they will attend class
gladly and will be more open to learn.

Additionally, the majority of the surveyed (59) and interviewed (8) teachers consid-
ered that in order for an activity to be motivating for students, it had to be age- and pro-
ficiency-level appropriate, interactive, and, above all, meaningful to their lives and
cultural context. Teachers agreed that activities that are connected to students’ back-
ground knowledge and experiences and that promote authentic communication are the
most successful:

T4: . . . that the activity is meaningful, that it means something for the students.

T7: A motivating classroom practice should be one that the students feel they can use in real
life. Like going for something in a restaurant so they feel it’s relevant to their lives and that they
have the vocabulary and structures to do it.

T8: I think the main purpose of an English class, of a language class, is you being able to share
ideas about the world, about your life, about a topic.

In the observed classes (15), the teaching methodology was centered on grammar and
textbook material. In most classes, teachers focused on presenting and explaining gram-
mar points and on having students practice the exercises in the textbook.

Discussion
Although surveyed teachers did not explicitly acknowledge the extent to which their own
motivation influences their students’ motivation, they did establish a direct connection
between the two. This relation between teachers’ enthusiasm and students’ motivation
suggests that motivation is not only a personal variable but also a response to what the
social environment provides (Ryan and Deci, 2009). It also confirms the centrality of
teachers’ own behavior in motivating students. Such behavior ‘becomes “infectious”,
instilling in students a similar willingness to pursue knowledge’ (Csikszentmihalyi, 1997
in Dörnyei, 2001: 32).

Autonomy
In general, teachers recognize the positive and beneficial effects of providing choice and
rationale. However, this belief was not evidenced in their practices. Limitations in provid-
ing meaningful decision-making opportunities might be associated with several reasons:

Downloaded from tre.sagepub.com at UNIV NEBRASKA LIBRARIES on October 21, 2015

Muñoz and Ramirez 211

(1) traditional teaching methodologies, centered on the teacher, that limit students’ auton-
omy or do not consider it at all; (2) curriculum constraints – most of the interviewed teach-
ers felt that complying with the syllabus and standards is one of the biggest obstacles in
motivating students because it prevents them from listening to their suggestions and giv-
ing them more choices; and (3) aspects of a traditional and collectivist local culture where
students are accustomed to viewing the teacher as the sole provider of knowledge and
where the needs and interest of the group are above the individual needs. Traditional
methodologies and curriculum constraints can influence students’ intrinsic motivation and
can also negatively influence the internalization of values and attitudes. In contrast, when
students are given choices and there is an absence of external pressure, it is possible to
maintain an internal perceived locus of causality and thus maintain a more intrinsic or
autonomous motivation (Ryan and Deci, 2009).
The absence of a rationale for performing class activities, especially the ones that
might not be of immediate interest or enjoyment, could be related to, once again, tradi-
tional ways of teaching where instructions are considered enough for students to accom-
plish a given task. Additionally, teachers might take for granted students’ comprehension
of the utility of a task. It is also possible that the knowledge of the correlation between
rationale and motivation is superficial or non-existent. There are not many studies that
have experimentally studied the effects of rationale on students’ motivation. However, in
the few studies that have been done, researchers have concluded that hearing a rationale
helps transform a boring task into a more interesting one, a strategy that can enhance
motivation ‘because increased interest predicts increased effort’ (Hidi, 2001 in Reeve,
et al., 2002: 185). If this rationale is given with non-controlling language and acknowl-
edging negative feelings, perceived autonomy (self-determination) and engagement will
also increase (Reeve, et al., 2002).
The discrepancy between teachers’ beliefs and practices regarding autonomy-support
additionally makes us think that it is possible that choice and rationale are not the most
important indicators of autonomy-support in this study.

Competence
There were no discrepancies between teachers’ beliefs and practices regarding clarity of
instructions. Teachers seem to be aware of the importance of making sure the guidelines
for performing tasks and activities are well-structured in order to promote successful task
completion. Giving clear instructions for task completion aids students in meeting the
challenges the task presents and, in consequence, helps them develop a sense of confi-
dence in their abilities.
Additionally, teachers value and use positive feedback with their students. Their use of
feedback is mostly limited to praising. In order for praising to promote competence and, to
some degree, also autonomy and relatedness, it needs to be based on students’ accomplish-
ment of learning objectives or class content (Cameron and Pierce, 1994; Wiersma, 1992).
For example, it is not enough to tell a student that he has done very well on a task, it is also
important to let him know what it is that he has done well in terms of a learning objective,
personal goals, or difficulties. This type of feedback contributes not only to a successful
performance but might also enhance feelings of competence, self-esteem, and pride.

Downloaded from tre.sagepub.com at UNIV NEBRASKA LIBRARIES on October 21, 2015

212 Theory and Research in Education 13(2)

Research on teacher praise has also suggested that recognition alone can decrease
intrinsic motivation (Brophy, 1981; Lepper, 1983). Additionally, according to Morine-
Dershimer (1982), praise given for accomplishing easy tasks can undermine achieve-
ment because students frequently perceived it as underserved. Furthermore, it also seems
that praise is commonly handed out unsystematically and unevenly by teachers.

Relatedness
Extrinsic motivation is more likely to become intrinsic motivation if the right social
conditions are given. It was clear in teachers’ expressions and classroom behaviors that
relatedness plays an important role in their philosophy and style of teaching. The need to
make students feel comfortable, relaxed, understood, and respected is an indication that
teachers value students and care about their learning process. According to Ryan and La
Guardia (1999,) supports for relatedness combined with supports for autonomy and com-
petence help internalization go beyond the simple adoption of new practices to the stu-
dent’s ownership of them; this has been described as the integration of extrinsically
motivated activities.

Motivating practices
Although teachers acknowledge the importance of meaningful and authentic activities,
their classes are mostly grammar-based and teacher-centered. It is possible that they
might not have an extensive knowledge on how to teach the language in a communica-
tive way since 50% of the teachers in the sample come from non-teaching backgrounds.
It is also possible that teaching communicatively requires more knowledge of the target
language, more planning, more time, more skills, more knowledge of students, and inter-
action with them, among other things, and teachers might have neither the time nor the
desire to go beyond their everyday teaching practices. As a result, it might be easier for
them to apply traditional methodologies focused mainly on grammar, textbook activities,
and praising. In addition, the local culture has traditionally promoted a top–down
approach to teaching where the teacher is perceived as the one who possesses knowl-
edge, is responsible for preparing, administering, and delivering the class and where
students are passive recipients of knowledge who do not contribute to the making of this
knowledge.
The introduction of meaningful activities in the classroom has implications for
autonomy, competence, and relatedness. First, when students see that the learning
activities have a connection with their life experiences, they will be more naturally
and autonomously inclined to participate in the tasks. Implicit in this idea is the stu-
dents’ free will to decide what they want to do and how they want to do it. Although
free choice is an indication of autonomy, only three of the interviewed teachers
explicitly mentioned that the most successful activities are those directly chosen by
the students. Second, teachers can foster competence by using meaningful activities.
When students have a genuine interest in getting involved in the activities, it is more
likely that they will perform successfully. Furthermore, encouraging meaningfulness
helps students transfer background knowledge to new situations as a response to a

Downloaded from tre.sagepub.com at UNIV NEBRASKA LIBRARIES on October 21, 2015

Muñoz and Ramirez 213

need or inquiry (Ausubel, 1983). Third, teachers’ choice of meaningful and relevant
activities is an indication of their understanding and concern for students. This reflects
teachers’ interest in creating a positive learning environment where relatedness plays
a vital role in students’ motivation and emotional development in the classroom
(Furrer and Skinner, 2003, cited in Crow, 2007).

Conclusion
The results of this exploratory study show that teachers’ potential to promote motivation
is mostly centered on the good rapport they establish with their students. This aspect
alone seems to make up, to some degree, for the absence of other motivating practices
based on the promotion of autonomy and competence. For example, a teacher who has a
highly empathic relationship with her students, based on good communication and
knowledge of their background and personal interests, can, sometimes, make decisions
for her students (types of activities, grouping, duration, methodology, etc.) that are often
well received and autonomously performed by them. Obviously, this is only apparently
true and it is also based on the idea that the teacher does not make those decisions based
on her preferences, but rather on what would be more appropriate and naturally enjoya-
ble for her students. If this were proven, it would be in accordance with the ‘active-
empathic view’ (Assor et al., 2002) which suggests that, in some cases, the importance
of autonomy enhancement is not the minimization of the teacher’s presence, rather that
the teacher’s presence helps the students to formulate and realize personal goals and
interests.
The idea that relatedness can, in some way, promote autonomy and competence seems
to show how interdependent they are on one another or how they mutually influence one
another. However, following Ryan and La Guardia (1999), it would seem that in order to
promote autonomy and competence, it is important, first of all, to establish the right
social conditions for this to happen. In this sense, we think that if we already have, more
or less, the right social conditions, given the meaningful relationships that teachers estab-
lish with students, this might facilitate the promotion of autonomy and competence that
would ultimately lead students to fully internalize motivation. We also consider that
relatedness could be the more difficult principle to promote, since honest caring and
concern for students and for their learning progress is not something that can naturally be
instilled in teachers; whereas autonomy and competence, less personal principles, might
be easier to be taught.
The results also indicate that teachers seem to promote competence in light of the
variables observed (clarity of instructions and positive feedback). It is, however, impor-
tant to take teachers beyond unsystematic and nonspecific praising, making them more
aware that praising is most effective when it is contingent on the attainment of some
standard of performance or personal goals. Competence is also a very important supple-
ment to autonomy and relatedness. Whenever an activity is clearly explained, under-
stood, and is relevant to course content and students’ lives, it is easier for them to invest
in the activity and willingly participate. Moreover, monitoring students’ understanding,
providing feedback, and being attentive to their needs and interests are characteristics of
empathic behavior displayed by the teacher.

Downloaded from tre.sagepub.com at UNIV NEBRASKA LIBRARIES on October 21, 2015

214 Theory and Research in Education 13(2)

The negative results concerning autonomy-support strategies might be a culture-

specific situation. It is possible that the local culture, being a collectivist culture, does not
value or promote autonomous behavior. If this were the case, it would not imply that
there is not room for teachers to learn how to create a space for students to find and make
connections between learning and their personal goals and interests. The teacher would
be present, but not as the sole provider and constructor of knowledge, but as an active
promoter and guide in the students’ search for these connections.

Declaration of conflicting interests

None declared.

Funding
This work was supported by Universidad EAFIT, Medellin, Colombia (grant number 261-000047).

References
Assor A, Kaplan H and Roth G (2002) Choice is good, but relevance is excellent: Autonomy-
enhancing and suppressing teacher behaviours predicting students’ engagement in school-
work. British Journal of Educational Psychology 72: 261–278.
Ausubel NH (1983) Psicología Educativa: Un punto de vista cognoscitivo, 2nd edn. México:
Editorial Trillas.
Black AE and Deci EL (2000) The effects of instructors’ autonomy support and students’ auton-
omous motivation on learning organic chemistry: A self-determination theory perspective.
Science Education 84: 740–756.
Bogdan RC and Biklen SK (1998) Qualitative Research in Education: An Introduction to Theory
and Methods, 3rd edn. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Brophy J (1981) Teacher praise: A functional analysis. Review of Educational Research 51: 5–32.
Brophy J (2006) Observational research on generic aspects of classroom teaching. In: PA Alexander
and PH Winne (eds) Handbook of Educational Psychology. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum,
pp. 755–780.
Cameron J and Pierce WD (1994) Reinforcement, reward, and intrinsic motivation: A meta-anal-
ysis. Review of Educational Research 64(3): 363–423.
Comanaru R and Noels KA (2009) Self-determination, motivation, and the learning of Chinese as
a heritage language. Canadian Modern Language Review 66: 131–158.
Connell JP and Wellborn JG (1991) Competence, autonomy and relatedness: A motivational anal-
ysis of self-system processes. In: M Gunnar and A Sroufe (eds) Minnesota Symposium on
Child Psychology. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, pp. 43–77.
Council of Europe (2001) Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning,
Teaching, Assessment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Crow SR (2007) Information literacy: What’s motivation got to do with it? Knowledge Quest
35(4): 48–52.
Csikszentmihalyi M (1997) Intrinsic motivation and effective teaching: A flow analysis. In: JJ
Bass (ed.) Teaching Well and Liking It: Motivating Faculty to Teach Effectively. Baltimore,
MD: Johns Hopkins University Press, pp. 72–89.
Deci EL (1971) Effects of externally mediated rewards on intrinsic motivation. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology 18: 105–115.

Downloaded from tre.sagepub.com at UNIV NEBRASKA LIBRARIES on October 21, 2015

Muñoz and Ramirez 215

Deci EL and Ryan RM (1980) The empirical exploration of intrinsic motivational processes. In: L
Berkowitz (ed.) Advances in Experimental Social Psychology. New York: Academic Press,
pp. 39–80.
Deci EL and Ryan RM (1985) Intrinsic Motivation and Self-Determination in Human Behavior.
New York: Plenum Press.
Deci EL and Ryan RM (2000) The ‘what’ and ‘why’ of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-
determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry 11(4): 227–268.
Deci EL and Ryan RM (2002) The paradox of achievement: The harder you push, the worse it gets.
In: J Aronson (ed.) Improving Academic Achievement: Contributions of Social Psychology.
New York: Academic Press, pp. 59–85.
Deci EL, Eghrari H, Patrick BC, et al. (1994) Facilitating internalization: The self-determination
theory perspective. Journal of Personality 62: 119–142.
Deci EL, Nezlek J and Sheinman L (1981) Characteristics of the rewarder and intrinsic motivation
of the rewardee. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 40: 1–10.
Deci EL, Schwartz AJ, Sheinman L, et al. (1981) An instrument to assess adults’ orientations
toward control versus autonomy with children: Reflections on intrinsic motivation and per-
ceived competence. Journal of Educational Psychology 73: 642–650.
Deci EL, Vallerand RJ, Pelletier LG, et al. (1991) Motivation in education: The self-determination
perspective. Educational Psychologist 26: 325–346.
Dörnyei Z (1994) Motivation and motivating in the foreign language classroom. Modern Language
Journal 78: 273–284.
Dörnyei Z (2001) Motivational Strategies in the Language Classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Dörnyei Z (2005) The Psychology of the Language Learner: Individual Differences in Second
Language Acquisition. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Dörnyei Z and Otto I (1998) Motivation in action: A process model of L2 motivation. Working
Papers in Applied Linguistics, Thames Valley University. Available at: http://www.
zoltandornyei.co.uk/uploads/1998-dornyei-otto-wp.pdf
Erlandson DA, Harris EL, Skipper BL, et al. (1993) Doing Naturalistic Inquiry: A Guide to
Methods. Newbury Park, CA: SAGE.
Evertson CM and Weinstein CS (eds) (2006) Handbook of Classroom Management: Research,
Practice, and Contemporary Issues. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Furrer C and Skinner EA (2003) Sense of relatedness as a factor in children’s academic engage-
ment and performance. Journal of Educational Psychology 95: 148–162.
Gardner RC (2001) Language learning motivation: The student, the teacher, and the
researcher. Available at: http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2sql/content_
storage_01/0000019b/80/29/cf/aa.pdf (accessed 27 July 2012).
Hardré PL and Reeve J (2003) A motivational model of rural students’ intentions to persist in,
versus drop out of, high school. Journal of Educational Psychology 95: 347–356.
Hardré PL, Davis KA and Sullivan DW (2008) Measuring teacher perceptions of the ‘how’ and
‘why’ of student motivation. Educational Research and Evaluation 14(2): 155–179.
Henderlong J and Lepper MR (2002) The effects of praise on children’s intrinsic motivation: A
review and synthesis. Psychological Bulletin 128: 774–795.
Hidi S (2001) Interest, reading, and learning: Theoretical and practical considerations. Educational
Psychology Review 13: 191–209.
Jang H, Reeve J and Deci EL (2010) Engaging students in learning activities: It’s not autonomy
support or structure, but autonomy support and structure. Journal of Educational Psychology
102: 588–600.

Downloaded from tre.sagepub.com at UNIV NEBRASKA LIBRARIES on October 21, 2015

216 Theory and Research in Education 13(2)

Koka A and Hein V (2003) Perceptions of teacher’s feedback and learning environment as pre-
dictors of intrinsic motivation in physical education. Psychology of Sport and Exercise 4:
333–346.
Lepper MR (1983) Extrinsic reward and intrinsic motivation: Implications for the classroom. In:
JM Levine and MC Wang (eds) Teacher and Students Perceptions: Implications for Learning.
Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, pp. 281–318.
Lepper MR and Hodell M (1989) Intrinsic motivation in the classroom. In: C Ames and R Ames
(eds) Research on Motivation in Education: The Classroom Milieu. New York: Academic
Press, pp. 73–105.
Levesque C, Zuehlke AN, Stanek LR, et al. (2004) Autonomy and competence in German and
American university students: A comparative study based on self-determination theory.
Journal of Educational Psychology 96: 68–84.
Miller RB and Brickman SJ (2004) A model of future-oriented motivation and self-regulation.
Educational Psychology Review 16(1): 9–25.
Morine-Dershimer G (1982) Pupil perceptions of teacher praise. Elementary School Journal 82:
421–434.
Muñoz A, Mueller J, Alvarez M, et al. (2006) Developing a coherent system for the assessment of
writing abilities: Tasks and tools. Ikala, revista de lenguaje y cultura 11(17): 265–307.
Namey E, Guest G, Thairu L, et al. (2007) Data reduction techniques for large qualitative data sets.
In: G Guest and K Macqueen (eds) Handbook for Team-Based Qualitative Research. New
York: Altamira Press, pp. 137–162.
Niemiec CP and Ryan RM (2009) Autonomy, competence, and relatedness in the classroom:
Applying self-determination theory to educational practice. Theory and Research in
Education 7(2): 133–144.
Noels KA, Pelletier LG, Clément R and Vallerand RJ (2000) Why are you learning a second
language? Motivational orientations and self-determination theory. Language Learning 50:
57–85.
Patton MQ (1990) Qualitative Evaluation and Research Methods. Newbury Park, CA: SAGE.
Reeve J (2006) Teachers as facilitators: What autonomy-supportive teachers do and why their
students benefit. The Elementary School Journal 106(3): 226–2336.
Reeve J, Deci EL and Ryan RM (2004) Self-determination theory: A dialectical framework for
understanding socio-cultural influences on student motivation. In: DM McInerney and S Van
Etten (eds) Big Theories Revisited (Research on Sociocultural Influences on Motivation and
Learning). Greenwich, CT: Information Age, pp. 31-60.
Reeve J, Jang H, Carrell D, et al. (2004) Enhancing students’ engagement by increasing teachers’
autonomy support. Motivation and Emotion 28: 147–169.
Reeve J, Jang H, Hardre P, et al. (2002) Providing a rationale in an autonomy-supportive way as
a strategy to motivate others during an uninteresting activity. Motivation and Emotion 26(3):
183–207.
Reeve J. (2002) Self-determination theory applied to educational settings. In: E Deci and R Ryan
(eds.) Handbook of self-determination research. Rochester, NY: University of Rochester
Press, pp. 183–203.
Ryan RM and Connell JP (1989) Perceived locus of causality and internalization: Examining rea-
sons for acting in two domains. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 57: 749–761.
Ryan RM and Deci EL (2000a) Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation: Classic definitions and new
directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology 25(1): 54–67.
Ryan RM and Deci EL (2000b) Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motiva-
tion, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist 55: 68–78.

Downloaded from tre.sagepub.com at UNIV NEBRASKA LIBRARIES on October 21, 2015

Muñoz and Ramirez 217

Ryan RM and Deci EL (2009) Self-determination theory and the role of basic psychological needs
in personality and the organization of behavior. In: OP John, RW Robbins and LA Pervin
(eds) Handbook of Personality: Theory and Research. New York: The Guilford Press, pp.
654–678.
Ryan RM and La Guardia JG (1999) Achievement motivation within a pressured society: Intrinsic
and extrinsic motivations to learn and the politics of school reform. In: T Urdan (ed.) Advances
in Motivation and Achievement. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press, pp. 45–85.
Ryan RM and Niemiec CP (2009) Self-determination theory in schools of education: Can an
empirically supported framework also be critical and liberating? Theory and Research in
Education 7(2): 263–272.
Ryan RM and Powelson C (1991) Autonomy and relatedness as fundamental to motivation and
education. Journal of Experimental Education 60: 49–66.
Ryan RM, Connell JP and Deci EL (1985) A motivational analysis of self-determination and
self-regulation in education. In: C Ames and RE Ames (eds) Research on Motivation in
Education: The Classroom Milieu. New York: Academic Press, pp. 13–51.
Ryan RM, Stiller J and Lynch JH (1994) Representations of relationships to teachers, parents, and
friends as predictors of academic motivation and self-esteem. Journal of Early Adolescence
14: 226–249.
Skinner EA and Belmont MJ (1993) Motivation in the classroom: Reciprocal effects of teacher
behavior and student engagement across the school year. Journal of Educational Psychology
85: 571–581.
Skinner E, Furrer C, Marchand G, et al. (2008) Engagement and disaffection in the classroom:
Part of a larger motivational dynamic? Journal of Educational Psychology 100(4): 765–781.
Taylor IM and Ntoumanis N (2007) Teacher motivational strategies and student self-determination
in physical education. Journal of Educational Psychology 99(4): 747–760.
Tucker CM, Zayco RA, Herman KC, et al. (2002) Teacher and child variables as predictors of aca-
demic engagement among low-income African American children. Psychology in the Schools
39: 477–488.
Van Manen M (1977) Linking ways of knowing to ways of being practical. Curriculum Inquiry
6(3): 205–228.
Vansteenkiste M, Simons J, Lens W, et al. (2005) Examining the motivational impact of intrinsic
versus extrinsic goal framing and autonomy-supportive versus internally controlling com-
munication style up on early adolescents’ academic achievement. Child Development 76
483–501.
Wiersma UJC (1992) The effects of extrinsic reward on intrinsic motivation: A meta-analysis.
Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology 65: 101–114.
Wiggins G (1998) Educative Assessment: Designing Assessments to Inform and Improve Student
Performance. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Author biographies
Ana Muñoz is interested in human motivation. Her research focuses on self-determination theory
(SDT) in second-language learning. She holds a Master’s degree in Teaching English to Speakers
of Other Languages (TESOL) and is currently the coordinator of the research team at the Language
Center, Universidad EAFIT, Medellin.
Marta Ramirez holds a Master’s degree in Psychology from the New School University, New
York. She currently works as a psychoanalyst. She is also a researcher in the research team at the
Language Center, Universidad EAFIT, Medellin.

Downloaded from tre.sagepub.com at UNIV NEBRASKA LIBRARIES on October 21, 2015

218 Theory and Research in Education 13(2)

Appendix 1
Open-ended questionnaire
Dear teacher,
We are gathering information for our current research study and would like to ask your
opinion about the following topics. Your responses are greatly appreciated, so take your
time to answer thoughtfully. Please, use legible handwriting.
Which of the following behaviors are important in influencing student motivation? If
you believe the behavior is important for student motivation, circle YES and then answer
the follow-up question. If you do not believe the behavior is important for student moti-
vation, circle NO and move on to the next behavior.

1. . . . explaining to students why certain activities are worth doing . . . YES   NO

How can drawing students’ attention to the objectives affect their motivation?
2. . . . letting students decide on some aspects of the class . . .    YES   NO
How can giving students’ different choices affect their motivation?
3. . . . respecting and caring for students . . .    YES   NO
How can respect and care affect student motivation?
4. . . . providing clear instructions  YES  NO
How can clarity of instruction affect student motivation?
5. . . . giving students positive and descriptive feedback (encouraging and inform-
ing them of their progress and how they can further improve)
6. Think of your most successful classroom activity. What makes it so
successful?
THANK YOU FOR YOUR VALUABLE TIME!

Appendix 2
Interview protocol
1. Please tell me what you take into consideration when you are planning your
classroom activities.
PROBE: Please mention three factors that you take into consideration when you
plan your lessons.
2. Please tell me your idea of a motivating classroom practice
PROBE: In your opinion, what characterizes a good learning environment?
3. Please think about a very motivating activity you planned for a class and
worked for you well. Tell me why you think it worked/it was successful.
PROBE: How can you tell that this activity was motivating and not just entertain-
ing students?

Downloaded from tre.sagepub.com at UNIV NEBRASKA LIBRARIES on October 21, 2015

Muñoz and Ramirez 219

4. Can you please tell me if there are any aspects of the class or the course in
which students have the possibility to decide? (List the aspects)
PROBE: How much participation do they have? (in the aspects that the teacher
mentions)
5. How can you help students understand the benefit of learning English or
doing certain tasks?
PROBE: Why is this important?
PROBE: Do you share any personal actions that may have worked for you as you
learned the language?
6. What factors do you believe can help students succeed in performing a task?
PROBE: Please tell me how important you think it is for students to feel accom-
plishment from the things they do in class.
PROBE: Do you, in any way, promote a feeling of accomplishment? How?
7. Please tell me how you would define or describe the following ideas: auton-
omy, relatedness, competence.
PROBE: To what degree do you believe that factor contributes positively to stu-
dent motivation?

Appendix 3
Observation form
TEACHER: _______ OBSERVER: ___Obs. #_______
DATE: _______ COURSE: _______ SCHEDULE: ___________

1. Classroom information (write a few lines about the room, number of students, basic
demographics (number of female/male students), resources available, sitting arrangement,
etc.)
2. Class description (a brief summary of what the teacher did in today’s lesson)

AUTONOMY

ITEM SEE IT? NOTES (description of the

item observed) COMMENTS
(observer’s insights about the
item observed)
Explanation of utility of tasks (why putting forth
effort during the activity might be a useful thing to
do, why it is valuable)
Giving choices (provide choice by asking what
students want, for example, which exercise do you
want to do first? which do you like best X or Y?
do you have any suggestions?)

Downloaded from tre.sagepub.com at UNIV NEBRASKA LIBRARIES on October 21, 2015

220 Theory and Research in Education 13(2)

COMPETENCE

ITEM SEE IT? NOTES (description of the

item observed) COMMENTS
(observer’s insights about the
item observed)
Clarity of instructions (clearly specify the steps
required to complete the task, makes sure
students understand)
Feedback (encouraging, descriptive)

RELATEDNESS

ITEM SEE IT? NOTES (description of the item

observed) COMMENTS (observer’s
insights about the item observed)
Respect (kindness, not
aggressive, not humiliating, not
using irony, mockery, insult)

Downloaded from tre.sagepub.com at UNIV NEBRASKA LIBRARIES on October 21, 2015