Teaching and Teacher Education 106 (2021) 103470

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Teaching and Teacher Education

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/tate

The feasibility of motivational strategies in language classrooms: A

tentative teacher-oriented definition
Tim S.O. Lee a, *, Daniel H.Y. Pun b
a
English Language Centre, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong, Room AG632, Core A, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hung Hom,
Kowloon, Hong Kong
b
English Language Centre, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong, Room AG645, Core A, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hung Hom,
Kowloon, Hong Kong

h i g h l i g h t s

Certain parameters of motivational strategies have been widely researched.

A new parameter of feasibility in language teaching contexts is called for.

Student-, teacher- and context-specific factors were identified by English teachers.

A concise definition of the new feasibility parameter is proposed.

The feasibility parameter is noticeably different from the effectiveness one.

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: In the last two decades, the same three parameters (frequency of use, importance, and effectiveness) of
Received 26 February 2020 motivational strategies in language classrooms have been thoroughly researched. This study proposes
Received in revised form establishing an additional parameter of feasibility to gauge the overall ease of using motivational stra-
19 June 2021
tegies. A questionnaire survey on 116 motivational strategies was conducted among 58 Hong Kong
Accepted 24 July 2021
teachers of English as a foreign language (EFL). After that, 20 of them participated in focused group
Available online 4 August 2021
interviews to provide further comments. Nine feasibility-related factors pertinent to students, the
teacher, and the educational context were identified, which contribute to a tentative and concise
Keywords:
Motivation
definition.
Motivational strategies © 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Feasibility
EFL
Hong Kong

1. Introduction
Motivation is a crucial determinant of success in language
learning, and language teachers play a pivotal role in maintaining
€rnyei, 1994; Williams & Burden,
and raising learners' motivation (Do
1997). It is hence important to investigate language teachers'
motivational strategies in diverse settings in order to provide
practical and theoretically sound motivational recommendations. A
large number of quantitative studies have focused on the param-
eters of frequency of use, importance, and effectiveness as well as
* Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: soltim.elt@gmail.com (T.S.O. Lee), daniel.pun@polyu.edu.hk
(D.H.Y. Pun).
their interrelationships (e.g. Cheng & Do €rnyei, 2007; Do €rnyei &
Csizer, 1998; Ruesch et al., 2012; Tavakoli et al., 2018). This seems
to imply that language teachers generally employ motivational
strategies which they consider more important and effective.
However, these teachers’ motivational efforts are also susceptible
to obstacles originating from different sources. Some common ex-
amples include frequent assessments, heavy administrative work-
load, and inadequate teacher training (Guilloteaux, 2013). Such
obstacles, though highly consequential, have only been discussed
by the aforementioned quantitative studies as speculated culture-
specific irregularities. There is a pressing need for a well-defined
new parameter which can address these obstacles in future quan-
titative enquiries.
Accordingly, this study aims to 1) elicit Hong Kong EFL teachers'
reflection on a range of motivational strategies accommodated by

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2021.103470
0742-051X/© 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
T.S.O. Lee and D.H.Y. Pun
Do€ rnyei's (2001) influential taxonomy, 2) identify factors which
either facilitate or inhibit the use of these strategies, and 3) propose
a new parameter named feasibility. It was found that all the re-
ported facilitative and inhibitive factors could be categorized as
student-, teacher-, or context-related. Based on the findings,
feasibility is tentatively defined as the likelihood of a language
teacher using a motivational strategy after considering the inse-
curity, worry, pressure, and hardship induced by it.
2. Literature review
2.1. Motivation and motivational strategies in language classrooms
Motivation, owing to its importance and multifaceted nature,
has been one of the most intensively examined constructs in
research on language learning. It pertains to the relationship be-
tween learners' attitudes towards the target language community
and their degrees of success in mastering that language (Gardner,
1985; Gardner & Lambert, 1972); it can be viewed as a situational
trait which is highly relevant to the language classroom and be
analysed in terms of the language level, learner level, and learning-
situation level (Do € rnyei, 1994); it possesses temporal and dynamic
dimensions, as evidenced by the transformation of initial wishes
into more concrete goals, and the evolution of motivation fuelled by
successes, failures, and continual evaluations (Do €rnyei & Otto ,
1998; Ushioda, 1998); and it is manifested in language learners’
awareness of the disjuncture between their current selves and their
ideal and ought-to selves, and their determination to eliminate the
disjuncture (Do € rnyei, 2005, 2009). Despite the diverse theories,
frameworks, and research foci of motivation, there is widespread
consensus that motivation plays a important role in language
learning. When other factors are equal, more motivated language
learners tend to attain higher proficiency than less motivated
learners, and low motivation may prevent highly competent lan-
guage learners from accomplishing long-term goals (Cheng &
Do€ rnyei, 2007; Do € rnyei & Csize r, 1998; Guilloteaux & Do € rnyei,
2008; Moskovsky et al., 2013).
In light of the importance of motivation to language learners, as
well as the unparalleled role of teachers in enhancing and pro-
tecting language learners' motivation in class, it is unsurprising that
the last two decades have witnessed a considerable amount of
research on the motivational effects of teaching. A frequently cited
pioneering study along this line of enquiry is Do € rnyei and Csizer's
(1998) quantitative study on Hungarian English teachers' use and
perceptions of 51 motivational strategies. The 51 strategies were
soon revised and expanded by Do € rnyei (2001) into a comprehen-
sive framework of 102 L2 (second language) motivational strategies
which are applicable in the following four motivational stages:

Creating the basic motivational conditions

Generating initial motivation

Maintaining and protecting motivation

Encouraging positive retrospective self-evaluation
This framework has been valuable to language teachers and
researchers because of two reasons: Its clarity and comprehen-
siveness make it readily adoptable in diverse teaching contexts;
and its close association with Do € rnyei and Otto  ’s (1998) process
model ensures theoretical soundness. Although proposed two de-
cades ago, it has good compatibility with more recent paradigms of
language learning motivation. For instance, the aforementioned
four motivational stages can accommodate the main components
of directed motivational currents (Do € rnyei et al., 2015): triggering
parameters, goal and vision orientedness, recurring and facilitative
routines, and positive emotionality. This influential framework has
2
Teaching and Teacher Education 106 (2021) 103470
constituted the basis of numerous studies worldwide aiming to
verify its universality and recommend motivational strategies to
specific ethnolinguistic learner groups (see Lamb (2017) for a list of
important studies on motivational strategies based on Do € rnyei's
(2001) taxonomy). In general, studies on language teachers' moti-
vational interventions have shown that certain motivational stra-
tegies appear to be universally endorsed, yet disagreements
between language teachers and learners about the relative impor-
tance of strategies are not uncommon. Perhaps the most uplifting
finding is that the use of motivational strategies can usually
engender motivated behaviours and positive attitudes towards the
language among learners.
2.2. Defining the recurring parameters in studies on language
teachers’ motivational strategies
While research on the motivating effects of language teaching
continues to grow in size and diversity, some striking similarities in
research design are noticeable, such as the parameters chosen for
investigation. Granted, research on language teachers' motivational
strategies has progressively pursued more ambitious goals (Lamb,
2017), which is evidenced by the shift from merely reporting
perceived features of strategies (e.g. Bernaus & Gardner, 2008;
Cheng & Do € rnyei, 2007; Do € rnyei & Csize
r, 1998) to putting more
emphasis on observed motivated behaviours (e.g. Guilloteaux &
Do€ rnyei, 2008; Wong, 2014) and adopting quasi-experiment de-
signs (e.g. Alrabai, 2016; Moskovsky et al., 2013). Despite the evo-
lution, the same set of parameters e perceived frequency,
importance, and effectiveness e can be seen in a large number of
quantitative studies. Table 1 provides a summary of diverse studies
on language teachers' motivational strategies which look into the
three parameters. One possible explanation is that these parame-
ters can be investigated fairly easily with questionnaires: Devising a
questionnaire for these purposes can be as simple as listing a se-
lection of strategies and providing a Likert scale of one of the pa-
rameters. The prevalence of these parameters is also attributable to
researchers’ aspiration to evaluate the cross-cultural validity of
motivational strategies and highlight culture-specific discrep-
ancies. One way to accomplish this is to refer to previous studies
and compare the rankings of strategies in different countries, which
were based on the frequency, importance, and effectiveness data
gathered with questionnaires. For example, the strategy of pro-
moting autonomy seems to be regularly used in Hungary but
virtually unused in South Korea (Guilloteaux, 2013), whereas North
American language teachers reportedly attach greater importance
to avoiding social comparisons than the Hungarian counterparts
(Ruesch et al., 2012). Such comparisons would not be viable if the
cited studies had not centred on the same parameters, or the pa-
rameters had not been given a consistent definition.
Among the three parameters, only perceived frequency can be
reported objectively and accurately with an interval scale. However,
the majority of the studies in Table 1 which examined perceived
frequency adopted an ordinal scale ranging from ‘hardly ever’ to
‘very frequently’. The exceptions, Sugita and Takeuchi (2010) and
Sugita McEown and Takeuchi (2014), requested English teachers to
report how many times a strategy was used in a lesson. To further
strengthen the comparability of the frequency data gathered from
different settings, it is advisable that future studies obtain not only
relative but also actual frequencies by defining frequency as the
number of times a strategy is used over a predetermined period,
such as within a lesson, a week, or a month.
The parameters of importance and effectiveness are not always
observable, and cannot be accurately quantified. Therefore, ordinal
scales have been adopted to examine them. Exemplar variations
include ‘very important e not important’ (Cheng & Do € rnyei, 2007),
T.S.O. Lee and D.H.Y. Pun
Table 1
Studies investigating perceived frequency, importance, and effectiveness of language teachers’ motivational strategies using questionnaires.
Studies Parameters
Perceived frequency
Alrabai (2011) Teachers
Alrabai (2014) Teachers
Alrabai (2016) / Teachers
Weng (2012) / /
€ rnyei and Csize
Do r (1998) Teachers
Cheng and Do €rnyei (2007) Teachers
Al-Mahrooqi et al. (2012) Teachers
Guilloteaux (2013) Teachers
Tavakoli et al. (2018) Teachers
Bernaus and Gardner (2008) Teachers and students
Ruesch et al. (2012) / /
Sugita and Takeuchi (2010) Teachers
Sugita McEown and Takeuchi (2014) Teachers
Wong (2014) Teachers
‘vital e not important’ (Al-Mahrooqi et al., 2012), ‘always motivated
e never motivated’ (Sugita McEown & Takeuchi, 2014), and ‘very
motivating e not motivating at all’ (Weng, 2012). While the
parameter of effectiveness has been rarely defined in detail, a
workable definition can be derived from that of the term ‘L2
motivational strategies’: language teachers' interventions to
arouse, enhance, and maintain learners' motivation and protect it
from distractions and detriments (Do € rnyei, 2001; Do € rnyei &
Ushioda, 2011; Guilloteaux & Do €rnyei, 2008). Presumably, effec-
tiveness pertains to the magnitude of any components of language
learning motivation raised by the teacher's motivational behav-
iours, unless certain components are specified in a study. Such a
compact and comprehensible definition can be included in a
questionnaire or any other data collection instruments with ease.
Examples of elicited positive attitudes, motivated behaviours, and
goals can also be provided.
The case of perceived importance is more complicated. The
practice of gauging the importance of individual motivational
strategies originated from Do €rnyei and Csize r's (1998) landmark
study in Hungary, and has been replicated by various studies
elsewhere. The definitions of importance in these studies are quite
similar: how important teachers consider certain strategies (Cheng
& Do € rnyei, 2007; Do€ rnyei & Csizer, 1998), or the amount of
importance teachers attach to certain strategies (Guilloteaux, 2013;
Tavakoli et al., 2018). These definitions, however, do not explain
what constitutes importance. Language teachers may perceive a
motivational strategy as important for different reasons: They may
see an association between the strategy and some institutional
expectations or regulations; they may regard the strategy as an
indispensable responsibility of a professional and caring teacher; or
they may consider the strategy a crucial part of the language
learning experience. It is also possible that importance and effec-
tiveness are viewed as identical, that is, strategies which can
strengthen language learners' motivation are deemed important e
a view implied by Ruesch et al.’s (2012) direct comparison of the
importance data from Hungary and Taiwan with the effectiveness
data from the US. Nevertheless, perceived importance, unlike
perceived effectiveness, has been rated by teachers only but not
students in previous studies. This may be an indication that the
parameters of importance and effectiveness are fundamentally
different, as teachers' and students' concerns do not always align.
Apparently, much work needs to be done to reduce the fuzziness
surrounding the importance parameter to make it more
researchable.
3
Teaching and Teacher Education 106 (2021) 103470
Perceived importance Perceived effectiveness
/ /
/ /
/
Teachers
Teachers /
Teachers /
Teachers /
Teachers /
Teachers /
/ /
Teachers and students
/ Students
/ Students
/ Teachers and students
2.3. Feasibility: A missing parameter?
Providing a concise and consistent definition of the above-
mentioned parameters is crucial for ensuring the validity of
research on motivational strategies in language classrooms. An
equally crucial issue is whether other influential parameters, in
addition to the trio of perceived frequency, importance, and effec-
tiveness, need to be examined. The substantial amount of research
focusing on the trio seems to imply that the frequency of use of a
motivational strategy depends mainly on its importance or effec-
tiveness. This is likely to be an oversimplification because a variety
of constraints may prevent language teachers from using a certain
motivational strategy as frequently as they prefer. A review of some
recent studies, including a few summarised earlier in Table 1, un-
veils diverse obstacles to language teachers’ motivational in-
terventions (see Table 2).
It is worth noting that most of these obstacles are not empirical
findings but only researchers' speculations on what causes the
underutilisation of important or effective motivational strategies.
Some of these obstacles have been regarded as culture-specific,
such as lower English proficiency among more experienced
Korean teachers of English (Maeng & Lee, 2015), a top-down
approach to language teaching as part of the Colombian culture
(Mun ~ oz & Ramirez, 2015), and a Chilean school culture which ad-
vocates the use of grades and extrinsic rewards to engage language
students (Glas et al., 2019). However, issues such as large class sizes,
rigid syllabi, unhelpful textbooks, and taxing administrative work
abound in diverse language teaching contexts. It is hence not totally
appropriate to discuss these concerns as scattered irregularities or
subsume them under the umbrella of cultural influences. Instead,
an additional parameter, provisionally named ‘feasibility’ in this
study, needs to be established to determine the overall ease of
deploying motivational strategies in language classrooms. A small
number of qualitative studies on the factors affecting language
teachers' motivational behaviours have indeed examined the issue
of feasibility. Lee (2015) and Glas (2016), for example, reported
teachers' expertise, available resources, preparation time, class
sizes, instructional freedom, and institutional support as poten-
tially feasibility-related factors. However, these factors were linked
to language teachers' motivational efforts collectively but not to
individual strategies, and no definition of feasibility was con-
structed to encompass these pressing concerns. Another note-
worthy study by (Lee and Lin (2019)) found that English teachers
occasionally used motivational strategies beyond Do € rnyei's (2001)
influential framework due to their ease of use and low costs. This
lends further support to the assumption that feasibility is a crucial
T.S.O. Lee and D.H.Y. Pun
Table 2
Studies discussing obstacles to language teachers’ motivational interventions.
Discussed obstacles
Large class sizes
Cultural norms endorsing obedient students and authoritarian teachers
Packed school schedules and rigid syllabi
Onerous work to turn textbooks into stimulating tasks
Frequent assessments and examinations
A school culture overemphasising grades and extrinsic rewards
Heavy administrative workload
Inadequate training in motivational techniques and an overreliance on general non-specific Guilloteaux (2013)
praise among teachers
Inadequate language proficiency among teachers
Cultural norms disfavouring comparison and competition
Intentional exclusion of language-related customs and values in textbooks
determinant of language teachers' motivational efforts.
In fact, the need to examine the feasibility of language teachers'
motivational strategies is underpinned by more than merely the
research domain of motivation. Language teachers' perceived
feasibility of motivational strategies unquestionably constitutes
part of teacher cognition, that is, “what teachers know, believe, and
think” (Borg, 2003, p. 81). Such feasibility-related perceptions, ac-
cording to Woods's (1996) conceptualisation of teacher cognition,
are manifestations of teachers' beliefs, attitudes, and knowledge
which often affect instructional practices. Research on the pro-
posed feasibility parameter, therefore, can shed further light on
how teacher cognition relates to classroom dynamics and students'
learning experience, which is one important goal of research on
language teacher cognition (Kubanyiova & Feryok, 2015). Another
research domain which merits a mention here is teacher wellbeing,
which has drawn increasing attention because of the ongoing is-
sues of teacher burnout, disengagement, and attrition (Acton &
Glasgow, 2015). It is plausible that factors which perceivably
lower the feasibility of motivational strategies are also detriments
to teacher wellbeing on individual, relational, and contextual levels.
In other words, language teachers' concerns about feasibility can be
examined in relation to some well researched components of
teacher wellbeing, such as a sense of autonomy and competence
(Soini et al., 2010), the quality of student-teacher interactions (Ross
et al., 2012), and school policies (Brady & Wilson, 2021).
In view of the absence of a feasibility parameter in previous
quantitative research on language teachers' motivational in-
terventions, this study aims to propose a concise definition of the
feasibility of motivational strategies in language classrooms. Such a
definition can expedite quantitative research which sheds light on
the degree of difficulty posed by individual motivational strategies
to language teachers. Qualitative research can then follow to
analyse the desirable yet less feasible strategies and suggest ways to
improve their feasibility. It is hoped that these new types of
research can widen the range of useable motivational strategies at
language teachers’ disposal and hence help them become more
confident and versatile motivators. To this end, this study aims to
uncover a range of teacher-reported constituents of the feasibility
parameter and formulate a tentative definition of feasibility.
3. Methods
3.1. Research context and participants
This study was conducted in Hong Kong, where Cantonese is the
dominant language in social and cultural contexts. The use of En-
glish is confined to the government, education, and business (Lai,
4
Teaching and Teacher Education 106 (2021) 103470
Studies
Alrabai (2011); Cheng and Do €rnyei (2007); Guilloteaux (2013); Tavakoli
et al. (2018)
Alrabai (2011); Cheng and Do €rnyei (2007); Mun ~ oz and Ramirez (2015);
Tavakoli et al. (2018)
Al-Mahrooqi et al. (2012); Alrabai (2011); Cheng and Do €rnyei (2007)
Cheng and Do €rnyei (2007); Tavakoli et al. (2018)
Guilloteaux (2013); Sugita and Takeuchi (2010)
Glas et al. (2019)
Guilloteaux (2013)
Maeng and Lee (2015)
Ruesch et al. (2012)
Tavakoli et al. (2018)
2015), which may attribute to the limited English proficiency of
the majority of Hong Kong people (Li, 2011). The negligible role of
English in Hong Kong outside educational and vocational settings,
plus a somewhat ‘utilitarian approach’ to English teaching (Lim,
2002, p. 266), may account for Hong Kong students' mediocre
motivation to learn English (e.g. Gan, 2009; Lo & Hyland, 2007;
Salili & Lai, 2003).
As language teachers in all contexts are believed to face pro-
found motivational challenges (Lamb, 2017), this study set out to
recruit EFL teachers from three institutional settings: secondary
schools, universities, and other tertiary institutions such as com-
munity colleges and vocational institutions. Snowball sampling
rather than personal selection was adopted for participant
recruitment in order to reduce the chance of bias caused by the
pattern of the authors' personal contact. Also, considering the
substantial input each participant was asked to provide without
compensation in this study, the personal referral process was
believed to help the investigators identify and recruit participants
more easily than random sampling. Specifically, two male and two
female teachers from each setting were first invited to participate.
They were the investigators’ colleagues or ex-colleagues who had
noticeably different characteristics. This was to ensure that the
initial set of participants was sufficiently varied and the final
sample would be less skewed. These initial participants then served
as seeds and introduced other potentially interested teachers, to
whom the invitation was further extended. Eventually a total of 58
EFL teacher participants having diverse characteristics were
recruited (see Table 3 for their demographic information). Before
the study commenced, these participants were informed about the
purpose and procedure, and were reassured of confidentiality and
anonymity.
3.2. Procedures and instruments
The data collection was administered in two stages. The objec-
tive of the first stage was to elicit a list of components of the
feasibility parameter. The instrument adopted should preferably
allow the participants to reflect on their experiences, perceptions,
and other unobservable phenomena at their own pace (Mackey &
Gass, 2015; Zimmerman & Wieder, 1977). To this end, a question-
naire (see Appendix A) was developed to gather the following in-
formation from each participant:

A motivational strategy which was feasible in his/her current
teaching setting and had been regularly used by him/her, and
two major factors which contributed to its feasibility
T.S.O. Lee and D.H.Y. Pun Teaching and Teacher Education 106 (2021) 103470

Table 3 dichotomy in the participating teachers, but to ensure that they had
Profile of participants. chances to discuss the feasibility parameter in the following four
Total participants Secondary University Other tertiary possible ways:
14 (4)* 23 (9)* 21 (7)*

The presence of a facilitative factor made a strategy more
Genders
feasible;
Male 5 10 9
Female 9 13 12
the absence of an inhibitive factor made a strategy more
Nativeness feasible;
Native 1 4 3
the presence of an inhibitive factor made a strategy less feasible;
Non-native 13 19 18
or
Teaching experience
<5 years 4 7 3
the absence of a facilitative factor made a strategy less feasible.
5e10 years 7 12 7
>10 years 3 4 11
Highest qualifications 3.3. Data analysis
Bachelor 6 0 0
Master 8 17 17
Doctor 0 6 4 Although the focus of the present study is on the feasibility of
motivational strategies rather than the strategies themselves, it is
The numbers of teachers who participated in the focus group interviews are pre-
sented parenthetically. imperative that the 116 strategies reported in Stage 1 be in line with
the commonly adopted definition and classification. Therefore, the
data analysis began with a comparison of the 116 recorded strate-

A motivational strategy which he/she had considered using but gies and Do € rnyei's (2001) framework, due to its wide recognition
turned out to be infeasible in his/her current teaching setting, and application in numerous studies on the motivating effects of
and two major factors which contributed to its infeasibility language teaching. It was found that all the reported strategies can
be accommodated by the framework (see Appendix C). This con-
This method was believed to be more valid than directly firms that the strategies covered in the present study are highly
requesting definitions from the participants for three reasons: The comparable to those investigated in earlier research.
participants would have the opportunity to reflect on both facili- The comments collected in the first stage were analysed with an
tative and inhibitive factors, covering more diverse perspectives; aim to distil them into a manageable set of feasibility-related fac-
the reported feasibility-related factors would be based on strategies tors. The researchers first read and discussed the comments. After
either regularly used or thoroughly evaluated by the participants, they had become reasonably familiar with the comments, they
rather than on imaginary situations; and the reported feasibility created a coding scheme, with reference to the previously proposed
concerns would be specific to motivational interventions but not feasibility-related concerns (see Table 2). The researchers also
about general language pedagogy. While the participants were also complied with the following principles when creating the scheme:
given a list of motivational strategies recommended by Do € rnyei
(2001) for reference, they were reminded that they were free to
The coding should turn the comments to units with clear con-
report any motivational strategies they had used or considered. The ceptual boundaries and as little overlap as possible.
participants reported 116 strategies and 232 comments on the
The units should be represented by a manageable number of
strategies’ feasibility in this stage. The comments were analysed categories, preferably no more than 10.
and condensed to a set of feasibility-related factors.
The resultant categories of factors should be encapsulated by
In the second stage, four focus group interviews were conducted three clusters, namely student-pertinent, teacher-pertinent, and
to elicit further comments and reveal other feasibility-related fac- context-pertinent factors.
tors which had not been reported in the questionnaire survey. It
was also hoped that the focus group interviews would elicit more Immediately after the interviews in Stage 2 had been completed,
interactional data, which are believed to enhance the coverage and the two researchers transcribed the interview data, read them
reliability of language teaching research (Ho, 2006). Twenty of the independently, and agreed that they could be accommodated by
teachers participated in the interviews. Each focus group was the aforementioned coding scheme. In other words, no new cate-
composed of five teachers, with at least one teacher from each of gory of feasibility-related factors was found in the focus group in-
the three teaching contexts. The arrangement was believed to terviews. They then followed the guidelines of Hak and Bernts
expose the participating teachers to issues less frequently discussed (2009) on content analysis and independently coded the com-
in their own teaching contexts and stimulate more thorough ments obtained from both stages. Whenever coding to multiple
reflection. The interviews were conducted in Cantonese Chinese, categories was possible, the most plausible category was selected.
and lasted 25e30 min. While a fairly simple interview guide (see An acceptable initial interrater reliability of 86 % (Miles &
Appendix B) was developed, most interview participants required Huberman, 2014) was observed. A subsequent discussion be-
relatively little prompt or help to elaborate on their previously re- tween the researchers identified some minor ambiguity between
ported factors and respond to each other's views. The four in- the factors of student readiness and teacher knowledge. They
terviews yielded an additional 81 comments on the feasibility of revised the coding scheme accordingly, and the final interrater
motivational strategies in language teaching. reliability rose to 93 %.
One important note is that this study does not aim to propose a
dichotomy between feasibility and infeasibility (i.e. a motivational 4. Results
strategy can be regarded as either feasible or infeasible). It is
beyond question that feasibility, similar to the other parameters of 4.1. Feasibility-related factors reported in the questionnaire
frequency, effective, and importance, can be viewed as being on a
continuum. The purpose of eliciting comments on both feasible The 58 participants provided 313 comments on the feasibility of
strategies and infeasible ones was not to inculcate such a debatable motivational strategies in language classrooms, which were put
into three clusters and nine categories of feasibility-related factors
5
T.S.O. Lee and D.H.Y. Pun
Table 4
Factors affecting the feasibility of motivational strategies in language classrooms.
Origins Factors
Student Student acceptance (non-content-specific)
Student acceptance (content-specific)
Student readiness
Student behaviours
Teacher Teacher workload and expenses
Teacher knowledge
Educational context In-class implementation
Course requirements
Institutional requirements
(see Table 4). A quick comparison of Tables 2 and 4 confirms that
most of the concerns proposed in previous studies can fit into the
present categorisation, and were present in the investigated En-
glish teaching contexts. Specifically, class sizes, syllabi, and school
schedules fall into the last three categories of contextual factors,
whereas teachers' workload and previous training correspond
closely to the two teacher-pertinent categories. Nevertheless, one
discrepancy between the findings here and the previously specu-
lated concerns stands out: Four out of the nine categories of
feasibility-related factors originated from the students, represent-
ing half of the comments (167/313). In other words, the findings
imply that student characteristics are a decisive determinant of a
strategy's feasibility. This contradicts the frequent speculation of
previous studies that cultural influences, which can affect both
students and teachers, account largely for the feasibility of moti-
vational strategies in language classrooms.
4.2. Student-pertinent factors
Among the nine factors, the most frequently quoted two were
student acceptance of the content covered by a motivational
strategy (47) and that of the other aspects of a strategy (62), ac-
counting for one-third of the 313 comments. When determining
the feasibility of a motivational strategy, the participants consid-
ered a wide range of non-content-specific features, including to
what extent it could create a supportive learning environment,
ensure anonymity, promote or avoid competition, and deemphasise
the importance of correctness. The participants’ strategy use was
apparently affected by their worries about lowered confidence,
embarrassment, loss of face, and worsened relationship as potential
threats to students.
The strategy can create a pleasant and supportive classroom
atmosphere where students do not feel threatened to speak up or
make mistakes in front of other classmates. (Questionnaire, sec-
ondary, Macrostrategy 10).
Students can respond anonymously, thus avoiding loss of face.
(Questionnaire, university, Macrostrategy 11).
Most students seem to enjoy the competitive atmosphere. Some
may not be as active, but they are not irritated either. (Question-
naire, university, Macrostrategy 1).
Involvement such as raising hands and asking questions does
not require students to provide a correct answer, so there will be no
embarrassment or loss of confidence. (Interview, secondary, Mac-
rostrategy 10).
Some Hong Kong students do not seem to enjoy working in
groups because it may undermine their relationship with class-
mates. (Interview, other tertiary, Macrostrategy 2).
The above excerpts, taken together, align somehow with the
motivational strategy of avoiding face-threatening acts such as
humiliating criticism or putting students in the spotlight, which is
included in Do €rnyei's (2001) taxonomy. However, the participants
6
Teaching and Teacher Education 106 (2021) 103470
Numbers of comments (n ¼ 313)
62
47
40
18
46
13
43
28
16
never described such avoidance as an effective standalone measure
to safeguard motivation. Rather, they tended to view students'
acceptance of a strategy's non-content-specific features and a
strategy's effectiveness as discrete matters, and the former appar-
ently took precedence over the latter.
Even if the strategy works for most students and only few stu-
dents feel very uncomfortable with it, I will not use it. (Question-
naire, secondary, Macrostrategy 6).
Regardless of the overall effectiveness of the strategy, embar-
rassment and tension among students have to be avoided when-
ever possible. (Questionnaire, other tertiary, Macrostrategy 16).
I will first make sure that students accept the strategy in general
and do not resist it, and then I will think of ways to enhance its
effectiveness. (Interview, university, Macrostrategy 7).
Apart from considering the non-content-specific properties of a
motivational strategy, the participants also stressed the importance
of incorporating interesting, relevant, or authentic content to a
strategy, as illustrated by the following excerpts:
Meaningful and authentic content inspires students and as a
result boosts their participation in the classroom. (Questionnaire,
secondary, Macrostrategy 5).
Students are quite practical here. Once they know the materials
are not directly useful for getting a better assessment performance,
they are less interested. (Questionnaire, university, Macrostrategy
4).
The content has to be interesting because students lack intrinsic
motivation to learn English, and they like to have fun in class.
(Questionnaire, other tertiary, Macrostrategy 1).
The English skills covered by the strategy are very useful to
other content subjects. (Interview, university, Macrostrategy 5).
The notions of interest, relevance, and authenticity can be found
in situated and process-oriented models of language learning
motivation (e.g. Do €rnyei, 1994; Ushioda, 1998; Williams & Burden,
1997), and strategies which address these facets of motivation are
numerous in Do € rnyei's (2001) taxonomy. Ostensibly, the excerpts
above suggest that the factor of students' content-specific accep-
tance of a strategy is analogous, or even identical, to a strategy's
effectiveness. The interpretation, however, was disproved by a
number of participants as follows:
It is not about whether the strategy will be effective to the whole
class in the end, but whether the strategy looks like an intentional
motivational effort to students. If it does, the worst possible result
will be that their motivation remains unchanged. I don't think any
students will be demotivated as a result of that. (Questionnaire,
university, Macrostrategy 9).
This is to ensure that even if not every student likes the strategy,
it will do no harm to their motivation. (Questionnaire, other ter-
tiary, Macrostrategy 12).
It is okay if the strategy does not turn out to be effective to
everyone, but it has to convey reasonably good and relevant con-
tent so that no adverse outcomes will ensue. (Interview, secondary,
T.S.O. Lee and D.H.Y. Pun
Macrostrategy 13).
If a strategy carries noticeably good content, students will be
less likely to resist it, even if they don't feel like reacting to it for
whatever reason. (Interview, other tertiary, Macrostrategy 8).
The above excerpts point to a possible criterion for strategy
selection: A strategy, even if deemed less than effective by students,
should not lead to demotivation, resistance, or other adverse ef-
fects. In contrast, the overall effectiveness of a strategy to the whole
class did not emerge as a primary concern in these excerpts.
Therefore, even though the factor of student acceptance (content-
specific) bears some relationship with students' resultant motiva-
tion, it should not be regarded as merely another manifestation of
the effectiveness parameter, which pertains to a strategy's potential
to increase or maintain language learners' motivation.
A considerable number of comments (40) were about students'
readiness to understand, follow, and benefit from a particular
motivational strategy. While some of them were related to stu-
dents' ability to concentrate, discipline themselves, and see the less
conspicuous value of English, half of the comments in this category
were concerns about students' English proficiency. This implies
that a strategy may induce different effects among students of
diverse proficiency levels. The impact of language learners' profi-
ciency on the feasibility of motivational strategies, although intui-
tively plausible, has been underresearched. Still, researchers such
as Bernaus and Gardner (2008) and Sugita and Takeuchi (2010)
have attributed varied effectiveness and frequency of some moti-
vational strategies to students' English proficiency level, which
essentially hints at the need to consider students’ proficiency when
selecting appropriate strategies.
Weaker students tend to lose their concentration fairly quickly,
so they are unable to fully benefit from the strategy. (Questionnaire,
secondary, Macrostrategy 7).
Most students are not yet able to relate themselves to any job,
let alone understand and appreciate the value of English to that job.
(Questionnaire, university, Macrostrategy 4).
The low self-management ability of students means that they
are not yet ready to implement the strategy in the intended
meaningful way (Questionnaire, other university, Macrostrategy
21).
This strategy is easy to comprehend and follow, so all students
can benefit from it regardless of their proficiency level. (Interview,
secondary, Macrostrategy 9).
Some students may not have adequate proficiency to contribute
to group work. (Interview, other tertiary, Macrostrategy 1).
The least frequently reported student-pertinent factor, student
behaviours (18), was derived from the participants’ worries about
numerous undesirable behaviours which could be unintentionally
elicited by motivational strategies. Some representative examples
were late assignment submission, increased use of the mother
tongue, cheating, and requests for rewards, which have been rarely
reported in previous studies on the motivational effects of language
teaching. These findings are further evidence that the participants,
when selecting feasible motivational strategies, aimed to avoid
negative sentiments and behaviours among students.
If students are so used to being rewarded for participating in the
activity, they may one day become reluctant to do the same without
rewards. (Questionnaire, secondary, Macrostrategy 3).
This strategy may look appealing, but it may encourage unde-
sirable behaviours like using L1 too much and unnecessarily, and
late submission of assignments. (Questionnaire, university, Mac-
rostrategy 7).
Students who are overly eager to win may resort to cheating,
which may discourage other students from engaging in the activity.
(Interview, secondary, Macrostrategy 1).
7
Teaching and Teacher Education 106 (2021) 103470
4.3. Teacher-pertinent factors
Two teacher-pertinent factors, teacher workload and expenses
and teacher knowledge, were found in the participants' comments.
The former was reported 46 times, meaning that it was likely to
impose substantial pressure on the participants as motivators. This
echoes the speculations and findings of previous studies (e.g. Glas,
2016; Guilloteaux, 2013; Lee, 2015) that language teachers’ work-
load may adversely affect their in-class motivational behaviours.
Most comments in this category were on the workload or expenses
incurred by a particular strategy rather than by quotidian teaching,
assessment, or administrative work, which confirms the strategy-
specificity of this factor. Also, as the participants rarely
mentioned any specific course detail, class characteristic, or
teaching setting in these 46 comments, the factor of workload and
expenses was regarded to be a teacher trait instead of a contextual
one.
Almost no prior preparation is needed. (Questionnaire, sec-
ondary, Macrostrategy 8).
Relevant materials are readily available, so not much prepara-
tion work or time is required. (Questionnaire, university, Macro-
strategy 1).
The strategy is manageable. It does not require much prepara-
tion, especially if students tell me in advance their questions.
(Questionnaire, other tertiary, Macrostrategy 6).
It costs too much. (Interview, secondary, Macrostrategy 3).
The strategy is not affordable in the long run, especially in large
classes … one possible way to reduce the cost is to reward winning
teams instead of individuals, but it would still be rather costly.
(Interview, other tertiary, Macrostrategy 3).
The other teacher-pertinent factor, teacher knowledge, has also
been documented or speculated in earlier studies (e.g. Glas, 2016;
Guilloteaux, 2013; Lee, 2015). However, it was mentioned much
less frequently than teacher workload and expenses, and in fact it
was the least frequently reported factor in this study. A few com-
ments were on the importance of gaining deeper understanding of
student backgrounds by providing one-to-one consultations and
reading their previous academic records and assignments beyond
class time. These comments were fundamentally different from
those on student readiness, which were mostly based on observ-
able in-class behaviours and performance. The remaining com-
ments in this category focused on the participants' familiarity with
certain motivational strategies. It was clear that some participants
experienced a sense of insecurity associated with less familiar
strategies. Although language teachers’ perspectives on motivation
(Cowie & Sakui, 2011) and language proficiency (Maeng & Lee,
2015) can potentially affect their motivational behaviours, no par-
ticipants reported their understanding of motivation or English
proficiency as either a facilitative or inhibitive factor.
I don't feel comfortable or confident enough to use this strategy
because my understanding of it is rather limited. (Questionnaire,
university, Macrostrategy 3).
The strategy is feasible only if the teacher has basic knowledge
as to what the students have previously experienced in their L2
learning. This can be attained by chatting with them during
consultation hours and by studying the mistakes in their assign-
ments. (Interview, university, Macrostrategy 6).
I am not sufficiently familiar with or skilled at this strategy.
(Interview, other tertiary, Macrostrategy 14).
4.4. Context-pertinent factors
The factors of in-class implementation (43) and course re-
quirements (28) were widely reported. Numerous comments in the
former category were about how the class size would affect a
T.S.O. Lee and D.H.Y. Pun
motivational strategy's feasibility. Large class sizes have indeed
been proposed earlier as a major obstacle to strategy imple-
mentation (see Table 2). Another reported constraint was available
class time, which has rarely been addressed in previous studies of
language teachers' motivational interventions. Some participants
also regarded the assurance of desirable outcomes such as effective
group work and fairness as hard circumstances.
It is hard to play games or use competitions in big classes of over
30 students. (Questionnaire, secondary, Macrostrategy 1).
It does not take much class time to use. (Questionnaire, uni-
versity, Macrostrategy 2).
There is insufficient time in class. (Questionnaire, university,
Macrostrategy 2).
When using this strategy, there is no limitation regarding the
class size. (Questionnaire, other tertiary, Macrostrategy 11).
This strategy may cause fairness issues. (Interview, secondary,
Macrostrategy 15).
Effective group work is difficult to manage or maintain. (Inter-
view, other tertiary, Macrostrategy 1).
The comments in the category of course requirements were
more homogeneous, as most of them were concerned with a
motivational strategy's congruence, or divergence, with the course
syllabus, content, or assessment. A few participants attributed the
underuse of a potentially effective strategy to the pressure caused
by a packed syllabus, which further establishes available time as a
crucial determinant of the feasibility parameter.
It does not fit naturally into the course syllabus. (Questionnaire,
secondary, Macrostrategy 2).
The strategy conforms largely to the course content and
assessment requirement. (Questionnaire, university, Macrostrategy
16).
There are no group assignments and group grades in the sub-
jects that I teach, making the strategy somewhat futile. (Ques-
tionnaire, other tertiary, Macrostrategy 21).
The syllabus packed, so there is no time for that. (Interview,
secondary, Macrostrategy 6).
The last contextual factor, institutional requirements, was
scarcely mentioned (16). The participants occasionally associated a
strategy's feasibility with differing rigidity of the school policies,
which could result in either facilitation or inhibition. Available time
emerged again as a concern, as a few participants believed that the
short semester rendered a motivational strategy infeasible.
It is probably against the school policies. (Questionnaire, sec-
ondary, Macrostrategy 15).
Another factor is the tight teaching schedule assigned by the
school e only 13 weeks per semester. (Questionnaire, university,
Macrostrategy 7).
This strategy is feasible thanks to the high degree of freedom
offered by the institution. (Questionnaire, other tertiary, Macro-
strategy 17).
4.5. Defining the feasibility parameter
Based on the analysis of the teacher participants’ comments, this
8
Teaching and Teacher Education 106 (2021) 103470
study proposes the following concise definition of the feasibility
parameter:
The feasibility of a motivational strategy in a language classroom
refers to the likelihood of it being used instead of abandoned or
replaced, given the insecurity, worry, pressure, and hardship it
causes the language teacher.
The issues of insecurity, worry, pressure, and hardship, which
constitute the overall difficulty of strategy implementation,
emerged frequently in the teachers' discussion of their motiva-
tional efforts. They faced insecurity when they considered using
less familiar motivational strategies or had little knowledge about
their students’ backgrounds; their worries about possible negative
sentiments, insufficient language proficiency, and undesirable
student behaviours drove them to avoid certain motivational
strategies; they felt pressured when there was insufficient prepa-
ration time, resource, or institutional support; and motivating
students in large classes without compromising fairness or group
cohesiveness was reported to induce considerable hardship.
One merit of the proposed concise definition of feasibility is that
it can reduce the ambiguity between this underresearched
parameter and the parameter of effectiveness. Effectiveness has
been implied by earlier research to be the extent to which a
motivational strategy successfully enhances any components of
learner motivation in a language classroom. If this definition holds,
only students e the recipients of motivational strategies e are able
to rate effectiveness objectively, whereas teachers can at best
anticipate it or observe certain facets of it, making effectiveness a
student-oriented parameter. This loose definition of effectiveness
does not cover issues such as institutional policies or the burden
imposed on the teacher. Therefore, even questionable strategies
such as using the mother tongue, highlighting and correcting every
mistake, and providing material rewards may be regarded as
effective, provided that teachers persist in employing them and
students' motivation is indeed raised. In comparison, the concise
definition of feasibility proposed by this study explicitly specifies
language teachers e the users of motivational strategies e as the
decision-makers, meaning that the feasibility parameter is teacher-
oriented. According to this proposed definition, a strategy's feasi-
bility is predicated on the magnitude of obstacle, namely insecurity,
worry, pressure, and hardship, perceived by the language teacher. A
strategy's effectiveness, or its motivational outcome, does not seem
to constitute part of the feasibility parameter. Numerous teacher
participants of this study did not feel restrained from using moti-
vational strategies with limited effectiveness, provided that no
negative student sentiments or behaviours would ensue. A some-
what similar finding that language teachers, aiming to reduce
resistance, might sometimes follow routines and avoid changes in
their motivational efforts was reported by Ehrman and Do € rnyei
(1998). These findings provide support for the distinction be-
tween the parameters of feasibility and effectiveness.
In addition to the concise definition proposed above, it also
seems possible to conceptualise the feasibility parameter in terms
of the sources of the impact. All the factors reported in this study
pertained to students, the teacher, or the educational context.
T.S.O. Lee and D.H.Y. Pun
However, other factors may exist in more culturally diverse
educational settings, and in communities with pervasive and deep-
seated beliefs about what constitutes effective language teaching.
Further research is warranted to uncover such cultural and societal
factors, and perhaps incorporate them into a more detailed yet
operational definition.
5. Conclusion
Notwithstanding the expanding amount and scope of research
dedicated to uncovering the motivational effects of language
teaching, quantitative studies focusing on the trio of frequency,
importance, and effectiveness remain the norm. The paucity of
studies taking feasibility into consideration is probably due to the
absence of a workable definition of this overlooked parameter.
While feasibility concerns manifest in different ways in language
teaching, the feasibility of motivational interventions is a worthy
research topic in its own right. This study shows that the feasibility
parameter is likely to comprise various factors originating from
students, the teacher, and the educational context, and proposes a
tentative definition of feasibility. This study also uncovers a range of
obstacles such as unfamiliarity with students' backgrounds, heavy
preparation workload, and difficult in-class implementation, which
may cause language teachers to abandon potentially effective
motivational strategies. Therefore, it is of paramount importance to
explore and address such impediments to language teachers’
motivational efforts, so that the overarching goal of research on
motivational strategies e promoting the use of empirically tested
strategies e can be accomplished.
Previous studies on language teachers' motivational in-
terventions have ranked individual strategies by perceived fre-
quency, importance, and effectiveness and yielded useful
recommendations. However, they provide little insight into factors
which may lower some strategies' feasibility and cause teachers to
abandon them, or possible ways to facilitate the use of such stra-
tegies. This study proposes a concrete and concise definition of
feasibility, in the hope that it can facilitate large-scale quantitative
studies on what motivational strategies pose difficulties to lan-
guage teachers in diverse educational settings. More focused
qualitative enquiries can then underline the exact problems
encountered by language teachers and evaluate the effectiveness of
different solutions. These further endeavours can address the issue
of feasibility more directly than any further attempts to speculate
reasons behind the underutilisation of certain strategies and clas-
sify them as cultural traits. The new findings will be valuable to
researchers, teacher educators, and school management who are
eager to promote more frequent and critical use of motivational
strategies in language classrooms. Such findings will also deepen
language teachers’ understanding of the common difficulties in
motivating learners, which probably will encourage these teachers
to seek more assistance from research literature, peers, and the
management.
A limitation of this study, apart from the inherent shortcomings
of using self-reported data, is a relatively small number of
9
Teaching and Teacher Education 106 (2021) 103470
participants recruited from a single city. Since most of the com-
ments from this small sample happened to be about avoidance of
undesirable reactions and outcomes, the tentative definition of
feasibility proposed here inevitably centres on a body of hindrance,
namely insecurity, worry, pressure, and hardship. The prevalence of
these four types of hindrance needs to be further examined,
particularly because their classification is somewhat less rigourous
than that of the origins of all the reported factors. Nevertheless, the
methods adopted in this study proved to be effective in capturing a
diversity of concerns among language teachers about motivating
learners, and examining the impact of such concerns on the feasi-
bility of motivational strategies. Replication studies in language
teaching contexts significantly different from Hong Kong in-
stitutions are called for to validate the tentative definition. Obser-
vations, which are more appropriate for examining situational aid
and hindrance to language teachers’ motivational efforts, can also
be conducted alongside surveys and interviews. If future studies
report greater perceived impacts of trust, freedom, peer and insti-
tutional support, and other facilitative factors on feasibility, the
definition can possibly be expanded and become the basis of a scale
with feasibility and infeasibility as opposing ends. Lastly, follow-up
studies involving larger numbers of teachers may reveal the
interplay between teacher backgrounds (genders, teaching expe-
rience, current teaching contexts, previous education, nativeness,
etc.) and the perceived impacts of various feasibility-related
concerns.
Declaration of competing interest
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.
Appendix A. Questionnaire for collecting feasibility concerns
1. Please state your current English teaching context and English
teaching experience (in years).
2. Please name one motivational strategy which you have used
regularly and is feasible in your English teaching context.
3. Please suggest two factors which contribute to the strategy's
high feasibility.
4. Please name one motivational strategy which you would like to
use but is not feasible in your English teaching context.
5. Please suggest two factors which contribute to the strategy's
low feasibility.
Appendix B. Focus group interview guide
1. Can you elaborate on the factor of ________ which you reported
earlier in the questionnaire?
2. Have you experienced other feasibility-related factors apart
from the ones you reported earlier in the questionnaire?
3. Have you experienced any of the factors reported by other
participants today?
4. How do you classify all the factors you have discussed today?
T.S.O. Lee and D.H.Y. Pun
Appendix C. Correspondence between reported motivational
€ rnyei's (2001) framework
strategies and Do
€ rnyei's (2001) macrostrategies
Correspondence to Do
1. Make learning stimulating and enjoyable for students by increasing the attractiveness of the tasks
2. Promote the development of group cohesiveness
3. Offer rewards in a motivational manner
4. Promote students' awareness of the instrumental values associated with the knowledge of a language
5. Make the curriculum and the teaching materials relevant to students
6. Develop a personal relationship with your students
7. Increase student motivation by actively promoting learner autonomy
8. Demonstrate and talk about your own enthusiasm for the course material, and how it affects you personally
9. Build students' confidence by providing regular encouragement
10. Create a pleasant and supportive atmosphere in the classroom
11. Help diminish language anxiety by removing or reducing the anxiety-provoking elements in the learning environment
12. Provide students with positive information feedback
13. Increase students' expectancy of success in particular tasks and in learning in general
14. Provide students with regular experiences of success
15. Use grades in a motivating manner, reducing as much as possible their demotivating impact
16. Make learning more stimulating and enjoyable by breaking the monotony of classroom events
17. Help students to create realistic learner beliefs
18. Make learning stimulating and enjoyable for students by enlisting them as active task participants
19. Present and administer tasks in a motivating way
20. Increase students' goal-orientedness by formulating explicit class goals accepted by them
21. Increase student motivation by promoting cooperation
22. Take students' learning very seriously
23. Formulate group norms explicitly, and have them discussed and accepted by students
References
Acton, R., & Glasgow, P. (2015). Teacher wellbeing in neoliberal contexts: A review
of the literature. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 40(8), 99e114.
Al-Mahrooqi, R., Abrar-ul-Hassan, S., & Asante, C. C. (2012). Analyzing the use of
motivational strategies by EFL teachers in Oman. Malaysian Journal of ELT
Research, 8(1), 36e76.
Alrabai, F. (2011). Motivational instruction in practice: Do EFL instructors at King
Khalid University motivate their students to Learn English as a foreign lan-
guage? Arab World English Journal, 2(4), 257e285.
Alrabai, F. (2014). Motivational practices in English as a foreign language classes in
Saudi Arabia: Teachers beliefs and learners perceptions. Arab World English
Journal, 5(1), 224e246.
Alrabai, F. (2016). The effects of teachers' in-class motivational intervention on
learners' EFL achievement. Applied Linguistics, 37(3), 307e333.
Bernaus, M., & Gardner, R. (2008). Teacher motivational strategies, student per-
ceptions, motivation, and English achievement. The Modern Language Journal,
92(3), 387e401.
Borg, S. (2003). Teacher cognition in language teaching: A review of research on
what language teachers think, know, believe, and do. Language Teaching, 36(2),
81e109.
Brady, J., & Wilson, E. (2021). Teacher wellbeing in England: Teacher responses to
school-level initiatives. Cambridge Journal of Education, 51(1), 45e63.
Cheng, H.-F., & Do € rnyei, Z. (2007). The use of motivational strategies in language
instruction: The case of EFL teaching in Taiwan. Innovation in Language Learning
and Teaching, 1, 153e174.
Cowie, N., & Sakui, K. (2011). Crucial but neglected: English as a foreign language
teachers' perspectives on learner motivation. In G. Murray, X. Gao, & T. Lamb
(Eds.), Identity, motivation and autonomy in language learning (pp. 212e228)
(Multilingual Matters).
€rnyei, Z. (1994). Motivation and motivating in the foreign language classroom.
Do
The Modern Language Journal, 78(3), 273e284.
€rnyei, Z. (2001). Motivational strategies in the language classroom. Cambridge
Do
University Press.
€rnyei, Z. (2005). Motivation and self-motivation. In Z. Do
Do €rnyei (Ed.), The psy-
chology of the language learner: Individual differences in second language acqui-
sition (pp. 65e119). Lawrence Erlbaum.
€rnyei, Z. (2009). The L2 motivational self system. In Z. Do
Do €rnyei, & E. Ushioda
(Eds.), Motivation, language identity and the L2 self (pp. 9e42) (Multilingual
Matters).
€rnyei, Z., & Csize
Do r, K. (1998). Ten commandments for motivating language
learners: Results of an empirical study. Language Teaching Research, 2(3),
203e229.
€rnyei, Z., Ibrahim, Z., & Muir, C. (2015). Directed motivational currents:
Do
10
Teaching and Teacher Education 106 (2021) 103470
Numbers of reported strategies (n ¼ 116)
14
11
10
10
8
7
6
5
5
5
5
4
4
4
3
3
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
Regulating complex dynamic systems through motivational surges. In
Z. Do€rnyei, P. D. MacIntyre, & A. Henry (Eds.), Motivational dynamics in language
learning (pp. 95e105) (Multilingual Matters).
Do€rnyei, Z., & Otto, I. (1998). Motivation in action: A process model of L2 motivation.
Working Papers in Applied Linguistics, 4, 43e69.
Do€rnyei, Z., & Ushioda, E. (2011). Teaching and researching motivation. Longman.
Ehrman, M. E., & Do €rnyei, Z. (1998). Interpersonal dynamics in second language ed-
ucation: The visible and invisible classroom. Sage Publications.
Gan, Z. (2009). ‘Asian learners’ re-examined: An empirical study of language
learning attitudes, strategies and motivation among mainland Chinese and
Hong Kong students. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development,
30(1), 41e58.
Gardner, R. C. (1985). Social psychology and second language learning: The role of
attitudes and motivation. Edward Arnold.
Gardner, R. C., & Lambert, W. (1972). Attitudes and motivation in second-language
learning. Newbury House.
Glas, K. (2016). Opening up ‘spaces for manoeuvre’: English teacher perspectives on
learner motivation. Research Papers in Education, 31(4), 442e461.
Glas, K., Tapia Carrasco, P., & Miralles Vergara, M. (2019). Learning to foster
autonomous motivation e Chilean novice teachers' perspectives. Teaching and
Teacher Education, 84, 44e56.
Guilloteaux, M. J. (2013). Motivational strategies for the language classroom: Per-
ceptions of Korean secondary school English teachers. System, 41(1), 3e14.
Guilloteaux, M. J., & Do € rnyei, Z. (2008). Motivating language learners: A classroom-
oriented investigation of the effects of motivational strategies on student
motivation. Tesol Quarterly, 42(1), 55e77.
Hak, T., & Bernts, T. (2009). Coder training: Explicit instruction and implicit so-
cialization? In K. Krippendorff, & M. A. Bock (Eds.), The content analysis reader
(pp. 220e233). Sage.
Ho, D. G. (2006). The focus group interview: Rising to the challenge in qualitative
research methodology. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics, 29(1), 5.1e5.5,
19.
Kubanyiova, M., & Feryok, A. (2015). Language teacher cognition in applied lin-
guistics research: Revisiting the territory, redrawing the boundaries, reclaiming
the relevance. The Modern Language Journal, 99(3), 435e449.
Lai, C. (2015). Perceiving and traversing in-class and out-of-class learning: Accounts
from foreign language learners in Hong Kong. Innovation in Language Learning
and Teaching, 9(3), 265e284.
Lamb, M. (2017). The motivational dimension of language teaching. Language
Teaching, 50(3), 301e346.
Lee, T. S. O. (2015). Factors affecting the use of L2 motivational strategies: Teachers’
understanding of motivation and beyond. The Asian Journal of Applied Linguis-
tics, 2(1), 3e16.
Lee, T. S. O., & Lin, S. Y. (2019). English teachers’ uses of motivational strategies
beyond an established framework. Educational Research, 61(4), 451e468.
Li, D. C. S. (2011). Improving the standards and promoting the use of English in
Hong Kong: Issues, problems and prospects. In A. Feng (Ed.), English language
T.S.O. Lee and D.H.Y. Pun
use and education across Greater China (pp. 95e113) (Multilingual Matters).
Lim, S. G. (2002). Cultural imagination and English in Hong Kong. In K. Bolton (Ed.),
Hong Kong English: Autonomy and creativity (pp. 265e280). Hong Kong Uni-
versity Press.
Lo, J., & Hyland, F. (2007). Enhancing students' engagement and motivation in
writing: The case of primary students in Hong Kong. Journal of Second Language
Writing, 16(4), 219e237.
Mackey, A., & Gass, S. M. (2015). Second language research: Methodology and design
(2nd ed.). Routledge.
Maeng, U., & Lee, S.-M. (2015). EFL teachers' behavior of using motivational stra-
tegies: The case of teaching in the Korean context. Teaching and Teacher Edu-
cation, 46, 25e36.
Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded
sourcebook (3rd ed.). Sage.
Moskovsky, C., Alrabai, F., Paolini, S., & Ratcheva, S. (2013). The effects of teachers'
motivational strategies on learners' motivation: A controlled investigation of
second language acquisition. Language Learning, 63(1), 34e62.
Mun ~ oz, A., & Ramirez, M. (2015). Teachers' conceptions of motivation and moti-
vating practices in second-language learning: A self-determination theory
perspective. Theory and Research in Education, 13(2), 198e220.
Ross, S. W., Romer, N., & Horner, R. H. (2012). Teacher well-being and the imple-
mentation of school-wide positive behavior interventions and supports. Journal
of Positive Behavior Interventions, 14(2), 118e128.
Ruesch, A., Bown, J., & Dewey, D. P. (2012). Student and teacher perceptions of
motivational strategies in the foreign language classroom. Innovation in Lan-
guage Learning and Teaching, 6(1), 15e27.
Salili, F., & Lai, M. K. (2003). Learning and motivation of Chinese students in Hong
Kong: A longitudinal study of contextual influences on students' achievement
11
Teaching and Teacher Education 106 (2021) 103470
orientation and performance. Psychology in the Schools, 40(1), 51e70.
Soini, T., Pyh€ €, K., & Pietarinen, J. (2010). Pedagogical well-being: Reflecting
alto
learning and well-being in teachers' work. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and
Practice, 16(6), 735e751.
Sugita McEown, M., & Takeuchi, O. (2014). Motivational strategies in EFL class-
rooms: How do teachers impact students' motivation? Innovation in Language
Learning and Teaching, 8(1), 20e38.
Sugita, M., & Takeuchi, O. (2010). What can teachers do to motivate their students?
A classroom research on motivational strategy use in the Japanese EFL context.
Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 4(1), 21e35.
Tavakoli, M., Yaghoubinejad, H., & Zarrinabadi, N. (2018). Using motivational stra-
tegies in L2 classrooms: Does culture have a role? Current Psychology, 37(3),
477e487.
Ushioda, E. (1998). Effective motivational thinking: A cognitive theoretical approach
to the study of language learning motivation. In E. A. Soler, & V. C. Espurz (Eds.),
Current issues in English language methodology (pp. 77e89). Universitat Jaume I.
Weng, T.-H. (2012). From the west to the east: To what extent are the motivational
strategies generalized in Asian EFL contexts? Sophia TESOL Forum, 5, 14e30.
Williams, M., & Burden, R. L. (1997). Psychology for language teachers. Cambridge
University Press.
Wong, R. M. H. (2014). An investigation of strategies for student motivation in the
Chinese EFL context. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 8(2),
132e154.
Woods, D. (1996). Teacher cognition in language teaching. Cambridge University
Press.
Zimmerman, D. H., & Wieder, D. L. (1977). The diary: Diary-interview method.
Urban Life, 5(4), 479e498.