International Journal of Language Learning and Applied Linguistics World
(IJLLALW)
Volume 5 (2), February 2014; 605-­‐619 Fahim, M., & Hajimaghsood, A ISSN (online): 2289-­‐2737 & ISSN (print): 2289-­‐3245 www.ijllalw.org THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN MOTIVATION AND
CRITICAL THINKING ABILITY OF IRANIAN EFL LEARNERS
Mansoor Fahim
College of Foreign Languages and Literature, Islamic Azad University, Science and Research
Campus, Tehran, Iran
Email: [email protected]
Arezoo Hajimaghsoodi (Corresponding author)
College of Foreign Languages and Literature, Islamic Azad University, Science and Research
Campus, Tehran, Iran
Email: [email protected]
ABSTRACT
Motivation and critical thinking have been recognized as crucial elements contributing to
learning. Although a considerable body of research has addressed motivation and critical
thinking (CT), little research has been conducted investigating the relationship between the two
constructs. The present study was conducted to investigate the relationship between motivation
and CT among pre-intermediate learners of English as a foreign language (EFL). For this
purpose, a group of 101 male and female learners, between 18 and 34 years old, majoring in
teaching English as a foreign language (TEFL) at Science and Art University in Yazd-the capital
of a province in Iran-were selected and given two questionnaires: a questionnaire of motivation
and a questionnaire of CT. The relationship between motivation and CT was investigated using
Pearson’s product-moment correlation coefficient. Preliminary analyses were performed to
ensure no violation of the assumptions of normality, linearity and homoscedasticity. The results
of this study led to the rejection of the null hypothesis indicating that there is a significant and
positive relationship between EFL learners’ motivation and CT (r = 0.796, p < 0.01). The
findings of this study can help EFL teachers, learners, and material developers to foster
learners’ CT ability and motivation.
KEYWORDS: critical thinking, motivation
INTRODUCTION
Recent trends in the education domain emphasize the importance of critical thinking skills for
academic success and life. Critical thinking has been called one of the most important attributes
for success in the 21st century (Hui, 1998). Meyers (1986) argued that for students to reach their
fullest potential in today‘s society, they must learn to think and reason critically. Critical thinking
is a reasonable reflective thinking that is focused on deciding on what to believe or do (Ennis,
1986, 1996). When we think critically, we are evaluating the solutions of our thinking processes.
In another words, critical thinking, as described by Marzano, Pickering and Pollack (2001),
includes reflective thinking that is focused on understanding an issue, creating and weighing
solutions, and making informed decisions. It is one of the objectives of education that students
obtain critical thinking skills enabling easy access to knowledge and overcoming challenges
more easily (Hudgins & Edelman, 1988; Halpern, 1993, cited in Semerci, 2011). Besides,
605
International Journal of Language Learning and Applied Linguistics World
(IJLLALW)
Volume 5 (2), February 2014; 605-­‐619 Fahim, M., & Hajimaghsood, A ISSN (online): 2289-­‐2737 & ISSN (print): 2289-­‐3245 www.ijllalw.org “critical thinking is the use of those cognitive skills or strategies that increase the probability of a
desirable outcome. It is used to describe thinking that is purposeful, reasoned, and goal directed”
(Halpern, 1997). However, a lot of factors contributed to a rich decision making and critical
thinking environment (Legant, 2010, cited in Semerci, 2011). One of the influencing factors that
enhance critical thinking ability is motivation (Lai, 2011).
Motivation has been widely accepted by both teachers and researchers as one of the key factors
that influence the rate and success of second/foreign language (L2) learning. Motivation provides
the primary impetus to initiate learning the L2 and later the driving force to sustain the long and
often tedious learning process; indeed, all the other factors involved in L2 acquisition presuppose
motivation to some extent. Without sufficient motivation, even individuals with the most
remarkable abilities cannot accomplish long-term goals, and neither are appropriate curricula and
good teaching enough on their own to ensure student achievement (Dornyei, 1998). Because of
the central importance attached to it by practitioners and researchers alike, L2 motivation has
been the target of a great deal of research during the past decades (Dornyei, 1998). Motivation
refers to “cognitive, emotional, and behavioral indicators of student investment in and
attachment to education” (Tucker, Zayco, & Herman, 2002, p. 477). It is obvious that students
who are not motivated to succeed will not work hard. A student with a high degree of motivation
towards success in a course will likely be more successful. Student motivation has been shown to
influence student attitudes and achievement in learning (Berg, 2001; Shih & Gamon, 2001).
Although a considerable body of research has addressed motivation and critical thinking, there
has been little research on the relationship between them. The aim of this study is to investigate
whether there is any significant relationship between motivation and critical thinking.
LITERATURE REVIEW
Critical Thinking
Educators have long been aware of the importance of critical thinking skills as an outcome of
student learning. More recently, the Partnership for 21st Century Skills has identified critical
thinking as one of several learning and innovation skills necessary to prepare students for postsecondary education and the workforce. In addition, the newly created Common Core State
Standards reflect critical thinking as a cross-disciplinary skill vital for college and employment.
Despite widespread recognition of its importance, there is a notable lack of consensus regarding
the definition of critical thinking (Lai, 2011).
The literature on critical thinking has roots in two primary academic disciplines: philosophy and
psychology (Lewis & Smith, 1993). These two separate academic strands, through different
approaches, define critical thinking with reflection of their own concerns. The third approach to
critical thinking is within the field of education (Sternberg, 1986). According to the study of Paul
and Elder (2001), critical thinking can be defined as a mode of thinking about any subject,
content, or problem. With critical thinking college students can manage their thinking structures,
employ intellectual criteria and finally improve their thinking quality. In the words of Lai (2011),
“Critical thinking includes the component skills of analyzing arguments, making inferences
using inductive or deductive reasoning, judging or evaluating, and making decisions or solving
606
International Journal of Language Learning and Applied Linguistics World
(IJLLALW)
Volume 5 (2), February 2014; 605-­‐619 Fahim, M., & Hajimaghsood, A ISSN (online): 2289-­‐2737 & ISSN (print): 2289-­‐3245 www.ijllalw.org problems”(p.2). It is a kind of purposeful and self-regulatory judgment, ending in interpretation,
analysis, evaluation and inference. It also involves conceptual and contextual basis of judgments
(Facione & Facione, 1996). In the eyes of Dewey (1933), learning to think is the central purpose
of education. For the term “Critical Thinking”, one of its most recent definition was put forward
by Browne and Keeley (2007). They defined “Critical Thinking” as “an awareness of a set of
interrelated questions, an ability to pose and answer critical questions at appropriate time and a
desire to actively use the critical questions”(p.2). Although the definition they provide has some
similarities and is in the same trend with the precedent definitions, their emphasis has been
placed on asking questions. Critical thinking is reasoned, reflective thinking focused on deciding
what to believe or what to do (Ennis, 1996). People think critically when they are trying to solve
a problem, assess an argument, decide about a belief, or make a decision in general. To achieve
these ends, critical thinking assesses not only the products and results of thought -that is, beliefs,
choices, conclusions, hypotheses, etc., but also the processes that have generated them, that
being, the reasoning that led to such conclusions and the nature of the decision-making process
leading to that alternative. Thus, critical thinking is a higher-order process and, as such, is not
automatic, requiring self-determination, reflection, effort, self-control and metacognition. In
other words, it is a conscious and deliberate process involving the interpretation and evaluation
of information or experiences (Mertes, 1991).
Motivation
Motivation to learn is an important component of learning (Deci & Ryan, 1985).Motivation is
typically defined in terms of an internal state of arousal that guides and sustains behavior.
Although 'motivation' is a term frequently used in both educational and research contexts, it is
rather surprising how little agreement there is in the literature with regard to the exact meaning
of this concept. Researchers seem to agree that motivation is responsible for determining human
behavior by energizing it and giving it direction, but the great variety of accounts put forward in
the literature of how this happens may surprise even the seasoned researcher (Dornyei, 1998).
Motivation is defined as the impetus to create and sustain intentions and goal seeking acts (Ames
& Ames, 1989). It involves four aspects: goal, effort, desire to attain the goal, and favorite
attitude towards the activity in question (Gardner, 1985). They are important because they
“determine the extent of the learner’s active involvement and attitude toward learning” (Ngeow,
1998).
Motivation would probably be identified as the most powerful influences on learning to most
teachers. SLA research also views motivation as a key factor in L2/FL learning. Brown (1994)
gave the definition of motivation as “the extent to which you make choices about (a) a goal to
pursue and (b) the effort you will devote to the pursuit”. Relating motivation to learn a second
language (L2), Gardner (1985) proposed, “Motivation is a term which is often used with respect
to second language learning as a simple explanation of achievement”. Gardner’s
(1985) definition of motivation in language learning was the “effort plus desire to achieve the
goal of learning the language plus favorable attitudes toward learning the language”. There are
also literally dozens of complementary theories of motivation in psychology. From the
behavioristic psychologists’ perspectives, the role of drive and reinforcement are emphasized,
and motivation is defined as “the anticipation of reinforcement” (Brown, 1994). Beginning in the
1990s, there was a transformation of defining motivation as a more dynamic and cognitive term
607
International Journal of Language Learning and Applied Linguistics World
(IJLLALW)
Volume 5 (2), February 2014; 605-­‐619 Fahim, M., & Hajimaghsood, A ISSN (online): 2289-­‐2737 & ISSN (print): 2289-­‐3245 www.ijllalw.org (Vandergrift, 2005). Cognitive view of motivation centers on individual making decisions about
their own actions as opposed to being at the mercy of external factors over which they have no
control (Williams & Burden, 1997). Social constructivists stressed motivation as a state of
cognitive and emotional arousal which leads to a conscious decision to act, and which gives rise
to a period of sustained intellectual and/or physical effort in order to attain a previously set goal
(Williams & Burden, 1997). In summary, L2 motivation is necessarily a multifaceted construct,
and describing its nature and its core features requires particular care.
Critical thinking and motivation
Critical thinking is related to motivation. Most researchers view critical thinking as including
both skills, or abilities, and dispositions. The disposition to think critically has been defined as
the “consistent internal motivation to engage problems and make decisions by using critical
thinking” (Facione, 2000, p. 65). Thus, student motivation is viewed as a necessary precondition
for critical thinking skills and abilities. Similarly, Halonen (1995) notes that a person’s
propensity, or disposition, to demonstrate higher-order thinking relates to their motivation.
Halpern (1998) argues that effort and persistence are two of the principal dispositions that
support critical thinking, and Paul maintains that perseverance is one of the “traits of mind” that
renders someone a critical thinker (1992, p. 13). Thus, like metacognition, motivation appears to
be a supporting condition for critical thinking in that unmotivated individuals are unlikely to
exhibit critical thinking. On the other hand, some motivation research has suggested that the
causal link goes the other way. In particular, some motivation research suggests that difficult or
challenging tasks, particularly those emphasizing higher-order thinking skills, may be more
motivating to students than easy tasks that can be solved through the rote application of a predetermined algorithm (Turner, 1995). Therefore the aim of this study is to investigate whether
there is any significant relationship between students’ motivation and critical thinking ability.
RESEARCH QUESTIONS AND HYPOTHESES
In order to investigate the relationship between motivation and critical thinking ability of the
EFL learners, the following research question was raised:
Q: Is there any significant relationship between motivation and critical thinking ability of Iranian
EFL learners?
In addressing the research question, the following null hypothesis was raised:
H0: There is no significant relationship between motivation and critical thinking ability of Iranian
EFL learners.
METHODOLOGY
Participants
The participants of this study were 101 male and female freshman university students studying
English Teaching at Science and Art University in Yazd, the capital of a province in center of
Iran. Their age varied between 18-34. Regarding general English proficiency, approximately
most of them were at pre-intermediate level based on their marks in the university entrance exam
608
International Journal of Language Learning and Applied Linguistics World
(IJLLALW)
Volume 5 (2), February 2014; 605-­‐619 Fahim, M., & Hajimaghsood, A ISSN (online): 2289-­‐2737 & ISSN (print): 2289-­‐3245 www.ijllalw.org in Iran. They have all passed some general English courses at high school before entering
university. These participants were selected non-randomly based on convenient sampling as they
were the only available students to the researchers.
Instruments
For the purpose of this study the following instruments were used:
Peter Honey’s (2000) 30-item critical thinking questionnaire adopted from Naieni (2005) to
evaluate the skills of analysis, inference, evaluation, and reasoning. The questionnaire is based
on a Likert scale, sequentially assigning values of 1,2,3,4, and 5 to options of never, seldom,
sometimes, often, and always. The participants’ scores were calculated by adding the numbers of
the scores. In this regard the result could vary from 30 to 150. It is self-evident that the higher the
mark, the higher critical thinker the participant is. The reliability of the questionnaire was
calculated to be 0.86 by Naieni (2005).
The motivation questionnaire of this study was the same questionnaire that Taguchi, Magid, and
Papi (2009) used in their study (for Iranian context), that is, the Persian-translated Iranian version
of the L2 Motivation questionnaire designed by Dörnyei and Taguchi (see Dörnyei 2010). The
questionnaire is mainly based on Dörnyei, Csizer, and Nemeth’s (2006) study and, among other
things, includes items related to ‘The L2 Motivational Self System’ such as ideal L2 self and
ought-to L2 self. The original questionnaire was designed in Japanese language and was later
adapted for use in China and Iran for Taguchi, Magid, and Papi’s (2009) study. All the three
versions of the questionnaire (Japanese, Chinese, and Iranian versions) are based on Likert scales
and have two sections. The items of the first section are statement type and the items of the
second section are question type. However, the total number of items in the three versions of the
questionnaire varies, and in the Iranian version there are 76 items. This questionnaire is also
based on a 6-point Likert-scale, sequentially assigning values of 1, 2,3,4,5, and 6 to options of
strongly disagree, disagree, to some extent disagree, to some extent agree, agree, and strongly
agree for the first section and no/not at all, not a lot, have no feeling, to some extent yes, yes a
lot, and yes very much for the second section. The participants’ scores were calculated by adding
the numbers of the scores .Therefore, the result could vary from 76 to 456. The rationale for
choosing this questionnaire in this research was, first and foremost, the fact that the questionnaire
is comprehensive and inclusive, and has managed to cover diverse aspects of L2 Motivation.
Besides, the design of the questionnaire has gone through a rigorous procedure with repeated
piloting which has led to a questionnaire with appropriate and acceptable reliability (see Dörnyei
2010).
Procedure
In order to test the research hypothesis of this study, the following steps were taken by the
researchers. First, 101 students were selected as participants of this study based on convenient
non-random sampling selection as these students were the only sample the researcher had easy
access to. It must be mentioned that due to the nature of correlational study, no criterion for
establishing homogeneity was adopted. Then, the selected L2 Motivation questionnaire was
administered to all the participants. The questionnaires were collected about an hour later in
order to avoid any pressure of time on student’s answers. The highest mark for this questionnaire
could be 456 and the lowest 76. In the next session, the participants were given the critical
609
International Journal of Language Learning and Applied Linguistics World
(IJLLALW)
Volume 5 (2), February 2014; 605-­‐619 Fahim, M., & Hajimaghsood, A ISSN (online): 2289-­‐2737 & ISSN (print): 2289-­‐3245 www.ijllalw.org thinking questionnaire. These questionnaires were also collected about half an hour later, there
was no pressure of time and the students had enough time to answer the questions. The highest
mark could be 150 and the lowest 30. To avoid any misunderstandings, the researchers used the
translated versions of the two questionnaires and explained how to answer them. In addition, the
students were informed that the results of their answers to these questionnaires would have no
influence on their course scores. Finally the researchers conducted Pearson Product Moment
Correlation Coefficient to investigate whether there is any significant relationship between
motivation and critical thinking ability of EFL learners.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
In order to investigate whether there is any significant relationship between EFL learners’
motivation and critical thinking ability; the researcher conducted a series of calculations and
statistical analysis.
The data analysis of this study consisted of descriptive statistics and inferential statistics. First,
descriptive statistics such as mean, standard deviation, and standard error of the mean were
obtained. Afterwards, inferential statistics were obtained. In order to use the Pearson’s ProductMoment Correlation, the assumptions of linear correlation were first checked to legitimize using
this parametric correlation:
Linear Relation between Variables
To check the linearity of the relations, a scattergram was created which is presented in Figure 1.
Figure 1: Scattergram Showing the correlation between CT and Motivation
As the figure shows the relationship between the scores on CT and motivation is linear as the
data points cluster around an imaginary straight line. Therefore, it was appropriate to test for a
linear relationship in the data by performing a correlation considering this assumption.
610
International Journal of Language Learning and Applied Linguistics World
(IJLLALW)
Volume 5 (2), February 2014; 605-­‐619 Fahim, M., & Hajimaghsood, A ISSN (online): 2289-­‐2737 & ISSN (print): 2289-­‐3245 www.ijllalw.org Normality of the Distribution
To check the normality of the distribution, the descriptive statistics of the data were obtained
which is demonstrated in Table 1.
Table 1: Descriptive Statistics of the Data
Descriptive Statistics
N
Mean
Statistics
Std.
Error
Std.
Statistic
Skewness
Statistic
Skewness
Std.
Error
Skewness
Ratio
Kurtosis
statistic
Kurtosis
Std.
Error
Kurtosis
Ratio
CT
101
105.46
1.64
16.58
0.436
0.24
1.81
-0.327
0.476
-0.686
Motivation
101
285.28
3.96
39.79
0.051
0.24
0.21
-0.902
0.476
-0.1894
As Table 1 shows, the distribution of data for CT and Motivation came out to be normal as both
skewness ratios (1.81 for CT and 0.21 for Motivation) and kurtosis ratios (-0.68 for CT and -1.89
for Motivation) fell within the range of -1.96 and +1.96 for these distributions. In addition,
Kolmogorov-Smirnov test was also conducted testing whether the motivation and CT are
normally distributed.
Table 2: Test of Normality
Test of Normality
CT
Motivation
Kolmogorov-Smirnova
Statistic
0.077
0.06
Df
101
101
Sig.
0.143
0.200
As table 2 indicates the significant values (0.143 for CT and 0.2 for motivation) are both higher
than 0.05, therefore the variable distributions for both are normal and conducting Pearson
Product-moment Correlation is legitimized.
Homoscedasticity
To check the assumptions of homoscedasticity, that is, the assumption that the variance of
residuals for every pair of points is equal, the residual plots (Figure 2 and 3) were examined
while inspecting both of the variables in this regard.
611
International Journal of Language Learning and Applied Linguistics World
(IJLLALW)
Volume 5 (2), February 2014; 605-­‐619 Fahim, M., & Hajimaghsood, A ISSN (online): 2289-­‐2737 & ISSN (print): 2289-­‐3245 www.ijllalw.org 612
International Journal of Language Learning and Applied Linguistics World
(IJLLALW)
Volume 5 (2), February 2014; 605-­‐619 Fahim, M., & Hajimaghsood, A ISSN (online): 2289-­‐2737 & ISSN (print): 2289-­‐3245 www.ijllalw.org Figure 2. Plot of Studentized Residuals
Figure 3. Plot of Studentized Residuals for Critical Thinking
for Motivation
As demonstrated by Figure 2 and Figure 3, the cloud of data is scattered randomly across the plot
and thus the variance is homogenous. Since the assumptions of correlation were all observed for
CT and motivation, the researchers ran Pearson’s correlation to investigate the questions of the
study.
Testing the Null Hypothesis
As it was mentioned, the normality of distribution for both of the variables provided justification
for using Pearson’s product-moment formula to compute the degree of relationship between the
variables. The outcome of this analysis is demonstrated in Table 3.
Table 3: Pearson Correlation between CT and Motivation
Correlation
CT
Motivation
Pearson Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
Pearson Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
CT
1
101
.796**
.000
101
Motivation
.796**
.000
101
1
101
As Table 3 indicates, the correlation came out to be significant at 0.01 level (r = 0.796, p < 0.01).
In addition, according to Table 4, R² (or common variance) which is the effect size for correlation
came out to be 0.63. Common variances of 25% and above are considered to be large effect size
(Cohen, 1992; Larson-Hall, 2010). Moreover, the 95% confidence interval of 0.71-0.85 is a very
small confidence interval. Higher power in a study will result in smaller confidence intervals and
more precision in estimating correlation. Therefore, the long effect size along with the small
confidence interval indicated that the correlation between the variables was highly reliable and
precise.
No of cases
101
R
0.796
Table 4: Correlation Report
Sig (2-tailed)
R2
0.0005
0.63
95% confidence Interval
0.71-0.85
This study investigated whether there is any significant relationship between motivation and
critical thinking ability of the EFL learners. On the basis of the results of the analysis of data
related to the questionnaires, the researchers were able to reject the null hypothesis of this study
which stated ‘there is no significant relationship between motivation and critical thinking ability
of EFL learners’. Therefore, it was confirmed that there is a significant and positive relationship
between CT and motivation. This result extends the previous similar research indicating the
relationship between CT and motivation (Garcia & Pintrich, 1992; Valenzuela, Nieto, & Saiz,
613
International Journal of Language Learning and Applied Linguistics World
(IJLLALW)
Volume 5 (2), February 2014; 605-­‐619 Fahim, M., & Hajimaghsood, A ISSN (online): 2289-­‐2737 & ISSN (print): 2289-­‐3245 www.ijllalw.org 2011). In addition, this positive relation may be a replication of many previous studies
concerning the effectiveness of critical thinking on the ultimate success of language learners in
the challenging process of foreign language learning. There are many other investigations that
confirm the effectiveness of critical thinking on different aspects of second or foreign language
learning that are conducted in different countries (Neubert & Binko, 1992; Atkinson, 1997;
Cairns, Gilbert, Mc Crickerd, Romig, & Younger, 2005), such as a positive correlation between
critical thinking and speed of reading (r = 0.19, p < 0.05) (Semerci, 2002). In another research, a
correlation of 0.41 was found between critical thinking and self leadership (Semerci, 2010). CT
has been found to be associated with motivational variables such as goal orientations, selfefficacy beliefs and effort (Leung & Kember, 2003). In this study a correlation of 0.796 was
found between CT ability and motivation which shows a significant relationship. Therefore this
study can serve as a starting point for English teachers to evaluate their current teaching
practices, and motivation to incorporate critical thinking skills in their classroom.
Since the result of the study reported that language learning motivation is significantly correlated
with critical thinking, and both are significant for achieving better foreign language; therefore, an
English teacher should understand more about students’ motivation and critical thinking ability in
order to assist students to achieve better results in language learning (Xu, 2011).
Moreover, from studying the related literature in critical thinking, one can understand that it has
significant impacts on improving the traditional methods of teaching, learning and the
educational system (Boloori & Naghipoor, 2013). Therefore, it can be concluded that the
utilization of critical thinking strategies would help learners work better in learning foreign
language.
CONCLUSION
As motivation has been shown to play a significant role in student achievement, techniques that
focus on increasing student motivation should be developed. Maehr and Midgley (1991) suggest
that changes need to be made at the school-wide level to increase student motivation rather than
only focusing on changes in individual classrooms. In addition, with motivation being as
important a factor in learning success (Dornyei, 1998), teacher skills in motivating learners
should be seen as central to teaching effectiveness. As Good and Brophy (1994, p.212, cited in
Dornyei, 1998) summarize, 'motivation in the classroom did not receive much scholarly attention
until recently, so that teachers were forced to rely on unsystematic 'bag-of-tricks' approaches or
on advice coming from questionable theorizing'.
On the other hand, critical thinking enables the learners to determine their own criteria and to
judge and question an idea or thought based on reliable evidence and produce assertions. They
need to produce assertions that are based on relevant, accurate facts; based on credible sources;
precise; unbiased; free from logical fallacies; logically consistent; and strongly reasoned” (Beyer,
1995). Therefore, critical thinking is a necessity at all levels of education for a lifelong learning.
It’s much easier to teach students to memorize facts and then assess them with multiple-choice
614
International Journal of Language Learning and Applied Linguistics World
(IJLLALW)
Volume 5 (2), February 2014; 605-­‐619 Fahim, M., & Hajimaghsood, A ISSN (online): 2289-­‐2737 & ISSN (print): 2289-­‐3245 www.ijllalw.org tests. When thinking critically is emphasized and taught, such a habit will probably be
transported to their lives. They will be individuals who are aware of their own learning, as those
who can question, judge and establish healthy reasoning based on reliable evidence and fight
against the fallacies and finally draw robust conclusions when they are required to solve
problems and make decisions.
The EFL/ESL classroom is a place in which teachers can promote the creation of critical thinkers
(Chamot, 1995). However, it is important to analyze the understanding of critical thinking
teachers may have and if this understanding is appropriate for the English language class-room as
pointed out by Atkinson (1997). There is a growing interest in the EFL classroom for the
inclusion of critical thinking skills in the repertoire of skills it aims at developing in students. One
way this is happening is through textbooks, some of which have started to include activities
geared to fostering these skills. Nevertheless, there is still a lack of consensus about the right
moment to introduce these skills, which skills to teach and what they mean among developers of
instructional materials and educators (Beyer, 1984). Therefore, teachers need to take a more
proactive role in the classroom. They need to research the topic and adapt materials at hand to
turn them into event-ful thinking encounters for their students. Teachers can use questions,
involve students in discussions on challenging and motivating topics, and engage students in
meaningful critical thinking processes. Moreover, teachers, syllabus designers, and material
developers should incorporate CT skills in to their classrooms, course books, and materials.
Incorporating critical thinking in course books results in educated students who are able to
effectively apply critical thinking skills to their academic studies (Kealey, Holland, & Watson,
2005). In addition, teachers will always work to motivate students. How they go about this will
vary from teacher to teacher. This research lends support to the existence of a relationship
between critical thinking ability and motivation. Findings show that with regard to some of the
unmotivated students, improved critical thinking skills reflected an improvement of motivation to
learn and it can be suggested that in order to raise students’ motivation, prior importance should
be attached to developing their critical thinking ability.
In the current study, the researcher employed the Motivational and CT questionnaires for
Language Learning as the instruments to obtain data and perform the statistical analyses.
However, every individual instrument has its strengths and weaknesses and they are not the only
instruments for investigating CT and motivation, although they are commonly used by many
researchers. Therefore, they may not cover all motivational variables and CT ability of EFL
learners, hence, some other instruments could be taken into consideration for further relevant
study. The survey technique was the only method adopted to investigate the language learning
motivation and CT ability use in this study, but there are still various research methods such as
interviews, classroom observations, diary analyses and experimental design which could be used
to obtain more information and may help reduce the bias caused by using a single research
method.
Moreover, this study has a comparatively small sample size. The participants of this study were
limited at only one university in Yazd. The number of subjects was limited to students who were
615
International Journal of Language Learning and Applied Linguistics World
(IJLLALW)
Volume 5 (2), February 2014; 605-­‐619 Fahim, M., & Hajimaghsood, A ISSN (online): 2289-­‐2737 & ISSN (print): 2289-­‐3245 www.ijllalw.org available for conducting this research by researchers. Further research can be done on larger
sample size to add to the findings of this study. Besides, it is hard to guarantee that students could
finish the questionnaire honestly, which may affect the accuracy of data information, and will
hence influence the result of the experiment, although the researchers had tried their best.
In future research, it is recommended to adopt both quantitative and qualitative analyses in the
research. These two kinds of research methods could mutually support each other in order to take
broad and clear views of language learning process.
Moreover, in the current research, only the relationship between language learning motivation
and CT ability was examined, while there are still various factors associated with critical thinking
ability. Therefore, the relationship between CT and other affective factors such as attitudes,
anxiety, and learners’ belief about their English learning could be examined in the future
research. In addition, parallel studies should be carried out on elementary and high school
students and teachers concerning the relationships between motivation and critical thinking.
The results promotes the existence of an interrelationship between critical thinking and
motivation, but future research should explore these findings in an attempt to further investigate
the impact improved critical thinking ability may have on students with varying levels of
motivation to learn.
REFERENCES
Ames, C., & Ames, R. (1989). Research in motivation in education. San Diego: Academic
Press.
Atkinson, D. (1997). A critical approach to critical thinking in TESOL. TESOL Quarterly, 31(1),
71–94.
Berg, E. S. (2001). An assessment of community college students’ learning styles, choice of
instructional delivery method, withdrawal rates, and performance in writing intensive
courses. Dissertation Abstracts International, 62 (10), 32-46.
Beyer, B. K. (1984). Improving thinking skills: defining the problem. The Phi Delta Kappan, 65
(7), 486–490.
Beyer, B. K. (1995). Critical thinking. Bloomington: Phi Delta Kappa Educational Foundation.
Boloori, L., & Naghipoor, M. (2013). The Relationship between critical thinking and
performance of Iranian EFL learners on translation tests. International Journal of Applied
Linguistic Studies, 1 (1), 7-13. Retrieved from http://www.science-line.com/index/
Brown, H. D. (1994). Teaching by principles: An interactive approach to language pedagogy.
NJ: Prentice Hall Regents.
Browne, M. N., & Keeley, S. M. (2007). Asking the right questions: A guide to critical thinking.
Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Cairns C., Gilbert, B., Mc Crickerd J., Romig, J., & Younger, B. (2005). Critical thinking,
research, and communication of knowledge in the teaching and learning experiences.
Singapore: Drak University.
616
International Journal of Language Learning and Applied Linguistics World
(IJLLALW)
Volume 5 (2), February 2014; 605-­‐619 Fahim, M., & Hajimaghsood, A ISSN (online): 2289-­‐2737 & ISSN (print): 2289-­‐3245 www.ijllalw.org Chamot, A. (1995). Creating a community of thinkers in the ESL/EFL classrooms. TESOL
Matters, 5 (5), 1–16.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human
behavior. New York: Plenum Press.
Dewey, J. (1933). How we think: A restatement of the relation of reflective thinking to the
educational process. Lexington, MA: D.C. Heath.
Dörnyei, Z. (1998). Motivation in second and foreign language learning. Language Teaching, 31
(3), 117-135. doi: 10.1017/S026144480001315X.
Dörnyei, Z. (2010). Questionnaires in second language research: Construction, administration,
and processing (2nd ed.). London: Routledge.
Dörnyei, Z., Csizér, K., & Németh, N. (2006). Motivation, language attitudes and globalisation:
A Hungarian perspective. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Ennis, R. H. (1986). A taxonomy of critical thinking dispositions and abilities: teaching thinking
skills theory and practice. New York: W.H. Freeman and Company.
Ennis, R. H. (1996). Critical Thinking. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.
Facione, P. A. (2000). The disposition toward critical thinking: Its character, measurement, and
relation to critical thinking skill. Informal Logic, 20 (1), 61–84.
Facione, N. C., & Facione, P. A. (1996). Externalizing the critical thinking in knowledge
development and critical judgment. Nursing Outlook, 44 (3), 129-136. Retrieved from
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0029-6554(06)80005-9
Garcia, T., & Pintrich, P. R. (1992).Critical thinking and its relationship to motivation, learning
strategies,
and
classroom
experience.
Retrieved
from
http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED351643.pdf
Gardner, R. C. (1985). Social psychology in second language learning: The role of attitudes and
motivation. London: Edward Arnold.
Halonen, J. S. (1995). Demystifying critical thinking. Teaching of Psychology, 22 (1), 75–81.
Halpern, D. F. (1997). Critical thinking across the curriculum: A brief edition of thought and
knowledge. London: LEA.
Halpern, D. F. (1998). Teaching critical thinking for transfer across domains: Dispositions, skills,
structure training, and metacognitive monitoring. American Psychologist, 53 (4), 449455.
Honey, P. (2000). Critical thinking questionnaire. Retrieved from http://www.Peter Honey
Publications.com
Hui, W. (1998). Critical thinking: An overview. Valdosta, GA: Valdosta State University.
Retrieved from http://chiron.valdosta.edu/whui_ /col/cogsys/cri_ hnk.html
Kealey, B. T., Holland, J., & Watson, M. (2005). Preliminary evidence on the association
between critical thinking and performance in principles of accounting. Issues in
Accounting Education, 20 (1), 33–49.
Lai, E. R. (2011). Critical thinking: A literature review. Pearson Research Report. Retrieved
from
http://images.pearsonassessments.com/images/tmrs/CriticalThinkingReviewFINAL.pdf
Leung, D.Y.P., & Kember, D. (2003). The relationship between approaches to learning and
reflection upon practice. Educational Psychology 23 (1), 61-71.
617
International Journal of Language Learning and Applied Linguistics World
(IJLLALW)
Volume 5 (2), February 2014; 605-­‐619 Fahim, M., & Hajimaghsood, A ISSN (online): 2289-­‐2737 & ISSN (print): 2289-­‐3245 www.ijllalw.org Lewis, A., & Smith, D. (1993). Defining higher order thinking. Theory into Practice, 32 (3),
131-137.
Maehr, M. L., & Midgley, C. (1991). Restructuring the school environment to enhance student
motivation and learning. American Educational Research Association Annual Meeting, 218.
Marzano, R, Pickering. D., & Pollack, J. (2001). Classroom instruction that works. Alexandria,
VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development
Mertes, L. (1991). Thinking and writing. Middle School Journal, 22, 24-25.
Meyers, C. (1986). Critical thinking: impact on nursing. Education Journal of Advanced
Nursing, 16 (5), 529-533.
Naeini, J. (2005). The effects of collaborative learning on critical thinking of Iranian EFL
learners (Unpublished master’s thesis). Islamic Azad University at Central Tehran, Iran.
Neubert, G. A., & Binko J. B. (1992). Inductive reasoning in the secondary classroom,
Washington D.C. :NBA Professional Library.
Ngeow, K. Y. (1998). Motivation and transfer in language learning. ERIC Digest. Indiana:
ERIC Digests.
Paul, R. W. (1992). Critical thinking: What, why, and how? New Directions for Community
Colleges, 77, 3–24.
Paul, R., & Elder, L. (2001). The miniature guide to critical thinking: Concept and tools. Dillon
Beach, CA: The Foundation for Critical Thinking.
Semerci, Ç. (2002). Reading pace, critical thinking and academic success. International
Education Conference. Famagusta, North Cyprus: Eastern Mediterranean University.
Semerci, C. (2011). The relationships between achievement focused motivation and critical
thinking. African Journal of Business Management, 5 (15), 6180-6185.
doi:10.5897/AJBM10.1231
Semerci, N. (2010). The relationships between self leadership and critical thinking. African
Journal of Business Management, 4 (8): 1639-1643.
Sternberg, R. J. (1986). Critical thinking: Its nature, measurement, and improvement. National
Institute of Education. Retrieved from http://eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED272882.pdf.
Taguchi, T., Magid, M., & Papi, M. (2009). The L2 motivational self system among Japanese,
Chinese and Iranian learners of English: A comparative study. In Z. Dörnyei & E.
Ushioda (Eds.), Motivation, language identity and the L2 self (pp. 66-97). Bristol, UK:
Multilingual Matters.
Tucker, C. M., Zayco, R. A., & Herman, K. C. (2002). Teacher and child variables as predictors
of academic engagement among low-income African American children. Psychology in
the Schools, 39 (4), 477-488.
Turner, J. C. (1995). The influence of classroom contexts on young children’s motivation for
literacy. Reading Research Quarterly, 30 (3), 410–441.
Valenzuela, J., Nieto, A. M., & Saiz, C. (2011). Critical thinking motivational scale (CTMS): A
contribution to the study of relationship between critical thinking and motivation.
Electronic Journal of Research in Educational Psychology, 9 (24), 823-848.
Vandergrift, L. (2005). Relationships among motivation orientations, metacognitive awareness
and proficiency in L2 listening. Applied Linguistics, 1, 70-89. doi:10.1093/applin/amh039
618
International Journal of Language Learning and Applied Linguistics World
(IJLLALW)
Volume 5 (2), February 2014; 605-­‐619 Fahim, M., & Hajimaghsood, A ISSN (online): 2289-­‐2737 & ISSN (print): 2289-­‐3245 www.ijllalw.org Williams, M., & Burden, R. L. (1997). Psychology for language teachers: a social constructivist
approach. Cambridge: CUP.
Xu, X. (2011). The relationship between language learning motivation and the choice of
language learning strategies among Chinese graduates. International Journal of English
Linguistics, 1 (2), 203-212. doi:10.5539/ijel.v1n2p203.
619