STUDENTS’ ENGLISH PROFICIENCY AND MOTIVATION AT ASIA PACIFIC INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY THAI PROGRAMS

Asia-Pacific International University STUDENTS’ ENGLISH PROFICIENCY AND MOTIVATION AT ASIA PACIFIC INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY THAI PROGRAMS A Master thesis Presented in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree MASTER OF EDUCATION by Somporn Khajornpop March 20th 2019

i STUDENTS’ ENGLISH PROFICIENCY AND MOTIVATION AT ASIA PACIFIC INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY THAI PROGRAMS A Master thesis Presented in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree MASTER OF EDUCATION By SOMPORN KHAJORNPOP APPROVAL BY THE COMMITTEE Darrin Thomas, PhD Josephine Esther Katenga, PhD Research Advisor Chair of Master Program Amanda Simon, PhD Naltan Lampadan Panelist Dean, Faculty of Education Damrong Sattayawaksakul, PhD External Examiner

ii DECLARATION “I certify that this thesis is my work and is free from plagiarism. I understand that the thesis may be checked for plagiarism by electronic or other means. The thesis has not previously submitted for assessment in any other course or institution. I have read and understood Asia- Pacific International University’s academic integrity policy.” Signature: Somporn Khajornpop Date: March 20th, 2019

iii TABLE OF CONTENTS DECLARATION ...........................................................................................................ii LIST OF TABLES.........................................................................................................v LIST OF FIGURES .......................................................................................................v CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................1 Motivation and Learning Outcomes ............................................................3 Students’ English Proficiency and Motivation at Asia Pacific International University (AIU)..................................................................3 Objective of this Study.................................................................................4 Research Questions......................................................................................4 Significance..................................................................................................4 Definitions....................................................................................................5 Organization of Chapters.............................................................................5 2. REVIEW OF LITERATURE ............................................................................7 Motivation....................................................................................................7 English Proficiency......................................................................................9 Education First Standard English test (EF SET) .................................9 Reading Comprehension ...................................................................10 Theories......................................................................................................11 Schema Theory..................................................................................11 Mental Model Theory........................................................................11 Proposition Theory ............................................................................12 Bottom-up Reading Model................................................................12 Top-down Reading Model.................................................................14 Interactive Reading Model ................................................................14 Listening Comprehension ..........................................................................15 Strategies....................................................................................................15 Listening with a Purpose ...................................................................15 From Passive to Active......................................................................16

iv Clear Instructions...............................................................................16 Use Variety........................................................................................16 Grammar............................................................................................17 Theory: ..............................................................................................17 Strategy ......................................................................................................18 Relate Knowledge Needs to Learning Goals.....................................18 Apply Higher Order Thinking Skills.................................................18 Provide Plentiful, Appropriate Language Input ................................18 Use Predicting Skills. ........................................................................19 Limit Expectations for Drills. ....................................................................19 3. METHODS OF THE STUDY.........................................................................21 Participants.................................................................................................21 Research Instruments.................................................................................22 4. RESULTS PRESENTATION .........................................................................24 Data Analysis Procedures..........................................................................24 Statistical Results.......................................................................................24 Sex Versus English Skills Performance ............................................25 Age Versus English Skills Performance............................................25 Major Versus English Skills Performance ........................................26 Degree Versus English Skills Performance.......................................26 Major Versus Motivation to Learn English.......................................26 English Proficiency Versus Motivation to Learn English ............................................................................................27 5. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION .............................................................29 REFERENCE...............................................................................................................32

v LIST OF TABLES 1. Interpretation of Mean Score of Motivational Levels......................................31 2. Major Versus Motivation to Learn English .....................................................33 3. Degree Versus English Skills Performance .....................................................34 LIST OF FIGURES 1. Student Demographics.....................................................................................28 2. Degree Versus English Skills Performance .....................................................33

1 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION The volume of research on foreign or second language (L2) learning motivation has increased remarkably over the last two decades (Dornyei, 2001; Dornyei, Csizer, & Nemeth, 2006; Kyriacou, 2005; Ushioda, 2006, Kyriacou & Zhu, 2008). In this globalized age, it is undeniable that English plays a dynamic role in world society. According to Lamb (2004), English is used not only in the Anglophone countries but also among many non-native speaking countries. Countries in Southeast Asia, including Thailand, realize the vital role of English as a lingua franca for foreign investment, the economy, industry, science, medicine, information technology, education, and communication. English is becoming a compulsory subject in all schools and universities across Thailand and its neighboring countries. Ellis (1997) points out that, as a teacher, we need to explore more fully the factors that are involved in motivating students in their learning, because this is onething that a teacher has some control over. Therefore, it is important to find out the possible underlying factors which affect students’ motivation to learn English, especially in the practical factor’s teachers can implement to stimulate students’ motivation. Subsequent to the Thai government's amendment to the education law in 1992 allowing Thai students to attend international schools, that isschools using English as a medium of instruction, the growth in the number of International schools in Thailand has been nothing short of phenomenal. Students prefer to attend

2 international schools (Techavijit, 2007) because they can learn the English language. Unfortunately, some parents cannot afford to enroll their children in an International school. However, under the 2002 Education Act Amendment, this guarantees students 14 years of free education (National Report, 2004). With this educational scheme, since English had long been made a compulsory subject from primary to the high school level, Thai students can learn English as early as the primary school level. Many foreign teachers, who’s native language is English, have been employed to teach English in public and private schools in Thailand. (Kitjaroonchai, & Kitjaroonchai, 2012; English First [EF] English Proficiency Index, 2017). Many kinds of test are taken by students to measure their English proficiency. Some require registration and payment to take, others are free to take. English First Standard English test is one of the free tests that can be taken anywhere and at any time with your gadget and internet access. Education First (EF) is an international education company, founded in 1965 by Bertil Hult in the Swedish university town of Lund, offers study abroad, language learning, cultural exchange and academic programs around the world. Still privately held by the Hult family, its 2017 data shows approximately 46,000 employees spread in 116 countries. They are responsible for publishing the annual EF English Proficiency Index, a ranking of English language skills by country through its EF Learning Labs. EF English Proficiency Index (EF EPI) is the world’s most significant ranking of countries and regions by English skills with 80 countries and regions. EF EPI published its first edition in 2011, it is increasingly cited as an authoritative source by journalists, educators, officials, and business leader. Its based on EF Standard English (EF SET) test data from more than one million test takers around the world. The EF

3 SET is an online, adaptive English test of grammar, reading and listening skills. It is a standardized, objectively-scored test designed to classify test takers’ language abilities. It is available to any internet user for free and registration is not necessary. Right after the test is completed, the percentage of scores are shown. Motivation and Learning Outcomes Motivation is the learner’s orientation regarding the goal of learning L2. If the participants are motivated to learn English, they should get high score when they take EF SET since they study in an international university. Motivation is widely accepted by educators as “a key component of a model of language learning achievement” (Gardner, 1985; Dornyei & Otto, 1998; Brown, 2000; Spolsky, 2000; Elyildirim & Ashton, 2006). “Motivation is defined as the extent ones strive to acquire the language because of the desire to do so and the satisfaction derived from it” Gardner (1985). Crookes and Schmidt (1991) define motivation as the learner’s orientation regarding the goal of learning L2. When students are motivated, they eager to learn and use English in their everyday lives. When they keep learning and using English, their English will improve better and better. In the opposite way, if they are not motivated, even though they got an A in their English classes, they will not able to communicate well in English. Students’ English Proficiency and Motivation at Asia Pacific International University (AIU) Students’ English proficiency and motivation at Asia Pacific International University (AIU) Thai program investigated the motivation of Thai program students majoring in Nursing, Business and English at Asia-Pacific International University (AIU), Saraburi Province, Thailand, and the correlation between the students’ learning

4 motivation and their English proficiency (EF English proficiency test) in grammar, listening and reading skills. Thai program at AIU uses Thai language as a median for learning. Although, English had long been made a compulsory subject from primary to high school level and Thai students can learn English as early as the primary school level but generally, Thai students are shy to use English in their daily lives. These Thai students have the opportunity to study in an international university, an environment best suited to learn and use English, that is if they are motivated to learn English, hence attain English proficiency. Objective of this Study This study aimed to measure the English proficiency of Thai students and investigate how motivated Thai students majoring in Nursing, Business and English at AIU are toward improving their English language skills. Research Questions 1. What are the students’ grammar proficiency? 2. What are the students’ listening proficiency? 3. What are the students’ reading proficiency? 4. How does motivation relate to English proficiency for Thai program students at AIU? Significance English as a Second Language (ESL) teachers will benefit from the findings. Teachers can understand the correlation between the students’ learning motivation and their English proficiency which will result in improving strategies for teaching. From the findings, it is possible that teachers can also gain ideas on what motivates students

5 to be proficient in learning English. With this knowledge, teachers can revise their methods of teaching which would benefit students in their classrooms. Definitions The following are definitions used in this paper. Motivation means to the level ones strive to acquire the language because of the desire to do so and the satisfaction derived from it. When students are motivated, they are eager to learn and use English in their daily lives. English proficiency has broad meaning in education but in this study it simply means the outcome of the EF Standard English test (EF SET) that the participants took. EF Standard English test (EF SET) is an online, adaptive English test of grammar, reading and listening skills. It is a standardized, objectively-scored test. It is available to any internet user for free and registration is not necessary and can see the result immediately. EF SET was suit at the time that this study happened because it was the school break. Organization of Chapters Chapter 1 talks about introduction, objectives, research questions and the significance of the study. And a listing down of definitions of terms and organization of chapters. Chapter 2 deal with literature review on motivation, English proficiency and Education First Standard English test (EF SET) that involve reading, listening and grammar. Chapter 3 presents on methods, participants and instruments of the study.

6 Chapter 4 discusses the data analysis procedures and statistical result of this study. Chapter 5 shows discussion and conclusion of this study.

7 CHAPTER 2 REVIEW OF LITERATURE Students’ English proficiency and motivation at Asia Pacific International University (AIU) Thai program investigated the motivation of Thai program students majoring in Nursing, Business and English at Asia-Pacific International University (AIU), Saraburi Province, Thailand, and the correlation between the students’ learning motivation and their English proficiency (EF English proficiency test) in grammar, listening and reading skills. Thai program at AIU uses Thai language as a median for learning. Although, English had long been made a compulsory subject from primary to high school level and Thai students can learn English as early as the primary school level but generally, Thai students are shy to use English in their daily lives. These Thai students have the opportunity to study in an international university, an environment best suited to learn and use English, that is if they are motivated to learn English, hence attain English proficiency. In this chapter, I would like to present some definitions that are used in my study followed by theories that inform teachers and finally, I will discuss strategies that have been used in teaching or acquiring the English language. Motivation There are many different definitions for the term motivation. “Motivation is defined as the extent ones strive to acquire the language because of the desire to do so and the satisfaction derived from it” Gardner (1985). Crookes and Schmidt (1991) define motivation as the learner’s orientation regarding the goal of learning a second

8 language. Motivation is considered significant in its role in language learning success. Along this line of thoughts, students’ motivation toward English language learning can, to a certain degree, influence their learning results.. Oxford and Shearin (1994) defined motivation as a desire to gain an objective, combined with the energy to work towards that objective. It is worth investigating how students become successful or fail in learning English, and the way they learn the language, and link it to what might affect their motivation According to Ellliot and Covington (2001), motivation gives the reasons for people's actions, desires, and needs. Motivation can also be defined as one's direction to behavior or what causes a person to want to repeat a behavior and vice versa. Zoltan Dornyei (2002) stated that the learner’s enthusiasm, commitment and persistence are the key determinant of success or failure. Broussard and Garrison (2004) defined motivation as the attribute that moves us to do or not to do something. Narayanan (2006) said that motivation is the reason or reasons behind one's actions or behaviors. Motivation is the reasons underlying behavior (Guay et al., 2010). Alizadeh, M. (2016) stated that there are four types of motivation. Instrumental, integrative, intrinsic, and extrinsic motivation. The instrumental motivation refers to acquiring a language as a means for obtaining instrumental objectives such as furthering a career, reading technical materials, translation, and so on. The integrative motivation describes learners who want to integrate themselves into the culture of the second language group and become involved in social interchange in that group. So, when people have integrative motivation, they have a desire to learn and use English for their individual purpose in daily life. If it happens in an English class,

9 it becomes effective for both teaching and learning. The students are enthusiastic and have energy to participate in class activities thereby achieving class’ objectives. English proficiency Simply means the outcome of the EF Standard English test (EF SET) that the participants took. Education First Standard English test (EF SET) The EF SET is an online, adaptive English test of reading and listening skills. It is a standardized, objectively-scored test designed to classify test takers’ language abilities. It is available to any internet user for free and registration is not necessary. Right after the test is completed, the percentage scores are shown. The EF EPI is based on results from three different versions of the EF SET. Two versions are available to any Internet user for free. The third is an online placement test used by EF during the enrollment process for English courses. An analysis was conducted of 48,200 test takers who completed multiple versions of the EF SET to establish a uniform and consistent method for scoring across them. The EF EPI 2017 country scores have been found to correlate strongly with TOEFL iBT 2016 country scores (r = 0.82) and IELTS Academic Test 2015 country scores (r = 0.71). These correlations show that, while these tests have different designs and test taker profiles, they reveal similar trends in national English proficiency. EF SET was suit at the time that this study happened because it was the school break. I just forwarded the link that the participants can access to EF SET then they just took the test anywhere and anytime on any gadget.

10 When the participants take EF SET, they are tested in three English skills: grammar, listening and reading. So, I would like to talk a little bit about these three skills in English Reading Comprehension One of the English skills that the participants were tested was a Reading test called the Reading Comprehension. Ratzler (2017) posted that reading comprehension is the ability to read, understand, process, and recall what was just read. Although many people can read, reading and reading comprehension are two different things. While reading involves translating and decoding text into sounds and spoken words, reading comprehension involves taking what was just read and deriving meaning from those words. In simpler terms, reading comprehension is the ability to read, understand, process, and recall what was just read. Collins English Dictionary states that reading comprehension (noun) is a text that students use to help them improve their reading skills, by reading it and answering questions relating to the text. Sometimes used as a test or examination of reading skills. The Literacy Dictionary (Harris & Hodges, 1995) textured that the following definition offers the most comprehensive and instructionally useful definition of reading comprehension: The construction of the meaning of a written or spoken communication through a reciprocal, holistic interchange of ideas between the interpreter and the message. The presumption here is that meaning resides in the intentional problemsolving, thinking processes of the interpreter, that the content of the meaning is influenced by that person’s prior knowledge and experience. (Harris & Hodges, 1995) Reading comprehension is a recurring test section in almost all of the tests for English

11 skills and it is one of the three sections of EF SET that was used as the instrument of this study. Theories The following theories have played a role in English language proficiency. Although different people learn differently, it is well known that students can learn through one or many theories. This section provides several theories used that are used by teachers to teach and also by students as the learn the English language acquisition. Schema Theory Gunning (1996) defines a schema as the organized knowledge that one already has about people, places, things, and events. Kitao (1990) says the schema theory involves an interaction between the reader’s own knowledge and the text, which results in comprehension. This schema, as Gunning defined, can be very broad, such a schema for natural disasters, or narrower, such as a schema for a hurricane. Each schema is "filed" in an individual compartment and stored there. In attempting to comprehend reading materials, students can relate this new information to the existing information they have compartmentalized in their minds, adding it to these "files" for future use. Based on the Schema Theory, depending on how extensive their "files" become, their degree of reading comprehension may vary. Mental Model Theory Based on the reading content, Mental Model can be thought of as a mind movie created in one's head. Gunning gives a detailed description of this process, stating that a mental model is constructed most often when a student is reading fiction. The mental model is re-constructed or updated to reflect the new

12 circumstances as the situation changes, but the items important to the main character are kept in the foreground according to Gunning, (1996). Perkins, (1991) identifies that sometimes misconceptions about important concepts reflect misleading mental models of the topic itself. However, the teacher can help the reader to stay on track and create a more accurate picture. One suggestion is for the teachers to ask the students to reveal their mental models of the topics in question, through similarity, discussion, picturing, and other ways. This information gives the teacher insight on the student's knowledge gaps and misconceptions, therefore allowing them to help students reconstruct a more accurate picture. Proposition Theory Propositional Theory involves the reader constructing a main idea or macrostructure as they process the text. These main ideas are organized in a hierarchical fashion with the most important things given the highest priority to be memorized Gunning, (1996), sited by Dorkchandra (2010). In reading comprehension, the participants should read the questions before reading the text because the questions will help the participants to spot for the most important things to remember to answer the questions. White out knowing the questions first, it is harder to remember what is the right point to answer the questions. When the participants know the question first then they have plan in mind what are they looking for while reading the text. Bottom-up Reading Model A bottom-up reading model emphasizes a single-direction, part-to-whole processing of a text. It emphasizes the written or printed text. It says reading is driven by a process that results in meaning, in other words, reading is driven by text. In the

13 beginning stages it gives little emphasis to the influences of the reader's world knowledge, contextual information, and other higher-order processing strategies. This reading model is developed by Gough (1972) who claims that reading is a process of decoding letter-by-letter. After readers begin to decode the letters of word level and syntactic features of text, they can build their textual meaning. They read texts by ways of focusing on linguistic forms at the level of word and sentence. As familiarities with the words increase, the readers will automatically recognize the words. This helps them to read fluently. On top of this, comprehension is produced when readers decode the letter, encode the sound and then construct the meaning from the text. (Dorkchandra, 2010, p. 9). Even though this model is considerable, some research pointed out that the spelling-sound correspondence is difficult and random. This process of reading causes slow and tough reading because of short-term memory overload, and readers’ easily forgetting what they have read at the end of the reading. According to Day and Bamford (1998), if a reader cannot keep a sentence long enough in the short-term memory, comprehension will be less adequate. Therefore, readers may remember only isolated facts but cannot integrate them into a consistent understanding. Another limitation of this model is that the information contained at this level cannot interact with the higher-level information (Rumelhart, 1977). Though the bottom-up reading process has been criticized as having covered only unilateral aspects of the reading process, it still has a great deal of contribution to reading research (Adams, 1990; Alderson, 2000; Lipson and Cooper, 2002; National Reading Panel, 2000). Sited by Dorkchandra (2010).

14 Top-down Reading Model This model is contrasted with the bottom-up model, because it emphasizes “from brain to text” (Eskey, 2005, p. 564). According to this model, what readers bring to text is more important than what the text brings. The main characteristic of this model is that the reader relies more on existing knowledge and makes minimal use of written information (Hayes, 1991; Smith, 2004). In this process, readers read in a cyclical process, making guesses about the message of the text and checking the text for confirming or rejecting cues, based on personal schemata and contextual clues. While reading, they fit the text information into their existing knowledge structure (Carrell and Eisterhold, 1983). The top-down reading model has a great deal of influence on L2 teaching, especially in promoting readers’ prediction, guessing from context, and getting the main idea. Interactive Reading Model However, some researchers suggested that during the reading process, comprehension is more complex than the two models would predict. They argued that comprehension is achieved through the interaction of both the bottom-up and top down processes. Therefore, a balanced view between language and reasoning process has been advocated by most L2 reading researchers (Carrell, 1988, 1991; Eskey and Grabe, 1988; Eskey, 2005; Grabe, 2004; Sarcella and Oxford, 1992) sited in Dorkchandra (2010) While reading, readers actively combine their bottom-up processes, for example, the ability to decode and recognize words and grammatical forms with their top-down processes, such as using background knowledge to predict and confirm meaning (Grabe, 2004) and, therefore, comprehension is the result of meaning

15 construction, not just transmission of the graphic information to the reader’s mind (Rumelhart, 2004). The interactive reading model is seen as similar in both first language (L1) and second langue (L2) contexts. Readers interact with the text to create its meaning as their mental processes work together at different levels (Carrell, Devine and Eskey, 1988; Rumelhart, 1977). The level of reader’s comprehension of the text is determined by how well the reader variables (interest level in the text, reading purposes, knowledge of the topic, target language abilities, awareness of the reading process, and level of willingness to take risks) interact with the text variables (text type, text structure, and vocabulary) (Hosenfeld, 1979). Listening Comprehension Listening comprehension encompasses the multiple processes involved in understanding and making sense of spoken language. These include recognizing speech sounds, understanding the meaning of individual words, and/or understanding the syntax of sentences in which they are presented. Listening comprehension is the receptive skill in the oral mode. Strategies Listening with a Purpose A student puts on a pair of headphones and hits “play” on the computer screen. He/she is sitting down to watch a movie – in English – in order to improve his/her listening skills. What’s the purpose of this exercise? While “improve listening comprehension” sounds like a good purpose, it’s not. Students need specific exercises, each with a specific purpose that goes beyond mere “listening”. They can listen to a

16 conversation with the purpose of identifying the speaker’s vacation plans. But there should always be a purpose to the listening exercise. Be sure to communicate what it is. From Passive to Active In the above situation where the student sits back and just listens, there is a misconception that he/she will passively improve his/her listening skills – just by listening. Students must be active in their listening exercises. They must be thinking of answers, options or ideas. Give them questions to answer or information to find out and have them report back their findings. Just make sure they are not simply “sitting and listening” Clear Instructions Do they have to complete a True/False exercise after the listening? Fill in blanks as they listen? Write down the answers to the questions, or raise their hands and say them out loud? Students must be clear on what is expected of them. Use Variety Do you always give your class song lyrics with gaps they must complete? What if you give two different groups two different sets of worksheets where the gaps are different? Students in Group A must then work with students in Group B and ask each other questions to find out the missing information. The class listens to the song at the end to confirm that the answers are right. In addition to the strategies listed above, there are other theories used to facilitate comprehension in order to make their learning more effective. These theories include what is used by listeners for their comprehension, namely: metacognitive, cognitive and socio-affective strategies. Metacognitive strategies are

17 important because they oversee, regulate or direct the language learning process. Cognitive strategies manipulate the material to be learned or apply a specific technique to a listening task. Socio-affective strategies describe the techniques listeners use to collaborate with others, to verify understanding or to lower anxiety. Research shows that skilled listeners use more metacognitive strategies than their less-skilled counterparts (O'Malley & Chamot, 1990, Vandergrift, 1997a) (Mendelsohn, 1998) notes a gap between the interests of listening researchers and classroom practitioners in that classroom materials do very little to develop metacognitive knowledge through raising learners' consciousness of listening processes. This shifts the emphasis of listening practice from product to process and the responsibility of learning from the teacher to the student, thereby helping students become self-regulated learners. Grammar The whole system and structure of a language or of languages in general, usually taken as consisting of syntax and morphology (including inflections) and sometimes also phonology and semantics. Theory: Theoretical grammar, in Chomsky's framework, is a scientific theory: it seeks to provide a complete theoretical characterization of the speaker-hearer's knowledge of her language, where this knowledge is interpreted to refer to a set of mental states and structures. It seems that in modern theoretical grammar the differences between morphological and syntactic constructions are beginning to show up, for example in the fact that, in the European languages at least, syntactic

18 constructions tend to be right-branching while morphological constructions tend to be left-branching. (Seuren, 1998, as cited in Nordquist, 2019, para. 7). Functional theories of grammar tend to pay attention to the way language is actually used in communicative contexts, and not just to the formal relations between linguistic elements (Nichols, 1984). This view of language is utilized to build the foundation for the education approach to language Strategy Relate Knowledge Needs to Learning Goals. Identify the relationship of declarative knowledge and procedural knowledge to student goals for learning the language. Students who plan to use the language exclusively for reading journal articles need to focus more on the declarative knowledge of grammar and discourse structures that will help them understand those texts. Students who plan to live in-country need to focus more on the procedural knowledge that will help them manage day to day oral and written interactions. Apply Higher Order Thinking Skills. Recognize that development of declarative knowledge can accelerate development of procedural knowledge. Teaching students how the language works and giving them opportunities to compare it with other languages they know allows them to draw on critical thinking and analytical skills. These processes can support the development of the innate understanding that characterizes procedural knowledge. Provide Plentiful, Appropriate Language Input. Understand that students develop both procedural and declarative knowledge on basis of the input they receive. This input includes both finely tuned input that requires students to pay attention to the relationships among form, meaning, and use

19 for a specific grammar rule, and roughly tuned input that allows students to encounter the grammar rule in a variety of contexts. Use Predicting Skills. Discourse analyst Douglas Biber has demonstrated that different communication types can be characterized by the clusters of linguistic features that are common to those types. Verb tense and aspect, sentence length and structure, and larger discourse patterns all may contribute to the distinctive profile of a given communication type. For example, a history textbook and a newspaper article in English both use past tense verbs almost exclusively. However, the newspaper article will use short sentences and a discourse pattern that alternates between subjects or perspectives. Awareness of these features allows students to anticipate the forms and structures they will encounter in the given communication task. Limit Expectations for Drills. Mechanical drills in which students substitute pronouns for nouns or alternate the person, number, or tense of verbs can help students memorize irregular forms and challenging structures. However, students do not develop the ability to use grammar correctly in oral and written interactions by doing mechanical drills, because these drills separate form from meaning and use. The content of the prompt and the response is set in advance; the student must only supply the correct grammatical form and can do that without really needing to understand or communicate anything. The main lesson that students learn from doing these drills is: Grammar is boring. Communicative drills encourage students to connect form, meaning, and use because multiple correct responses are possible. In communicative drills, students respond to a prompt using the grammar point under consideration but providing their

20 own content. For example, to practice questions and answers in the past tense in English, teacher and students can ask and answer questions about activities the previous evening.

21 CHAPTER 3 METHODS OF THE STUDY Students’ English Proficiency and Motivation at AIU Thai program explored the motivation of Thai program students majoring in Nursing, Business and English at AIU, Saraburi Province, Thailand, and the association between the students’ learning motivation and their English proficiency in grammar, listening and reading skills. Student who has had opportunity to study in international university, if one is motivated to learn English, he/she may have a good English proficiency. This section describes and explains the methodology used in the current English language learning motivation study. It outlines the approach taken in gathering, analyzing and interpreting the data, to understand English language motivation of the students toward better English performance. Participants The participants, drawn by using a purposive selection, were 50 (n=50) Thai program students majoring in Nursing, Business and English at Asia-Pacific International University. They have learned English at each levels of their study journey like primary school, high school and college. Choomthong & Chaichompoo, (2015) declared that it has been observed that English major students and non-English major students performed differently in learning English. It is interesting to explore and survey what motivation students have in learning English. This study focused on Thai Program both English major students and non-English major students.

22 Figure 1. Student Demographics Research Instruments The data collection instruments used in this study were an online test and an online questionnaire. The purposely selected participants were directed to the English online test at the following link: http://www.englishtown.com/community/Channels/AcademicTest/skill.aspx?etag=E1 24745&ptn=memb The test took about 20 minutes to finish and the scores for each test session, grammar, reading and listening, were displayed right after the test was completed. To assure that the respondents had no difficulty understanding and responding to the questions, the questionnaire was written in Thai (see Appendix 1). The questionnaire consists of 3 parts. Part 1 asks for the score that the participant got from the given online test. Part 2 asked for personal information of participants such as gender, age, major, education degree. Part 3 consisted of 3 items, representing the quality of the test; 7 items 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 Nursing Business English

23 representing the participants’ motivation to study English. Under each item is a 5- point Likert scale from 5 (strongly agree) to 1 (strongly disagree). This aims to identify the degree of agreement or disagreement each student had. The participant had to take the given online test before answering the questionnaire.

24 CHAPTER 4 RESULTS PRESENTATION Students’ English Proficiency and Motivation at AIU Thai program surveyed the motivation of Thai program students majoring in Nursing, Business and English at AIU, Saraburi Province, Thailand, and the relationship between the students’ learning motivation and their English proficiency in grammar, listening and reading skills. Student who has had opportunity to attend international university, if one is motivated to learn English, he/she may have a good English proficiency. The data is analyzed in this chapter; Data Analysis Procedures The data collected from the questionnaire in this study were computed and analyzed in terms of means and standard deviation by using SPSS. To interpret the mean score for students’ motivational level, the researchers adopted the interpreting procedure designed by Best (1981) and Degang (2010) as follows: The mean score for each item indicated the level of students’ motivation; a high score meant students had high motivation, while a low score meant students had low motivation Statistical Results The respondents' English performance score was 49.13% The respondents' grammar proficiency was 50.80%

25 The respondents' listening proficiency was 48.70% The respondents' reading proficiency was 47.90% Table 1. Interpretation of Mean Score of Motivational Levels Scale Mean Range Motivational Level Score Range 5 strongly agree very high 4.50-5.00 4 agree high 3.50-4.49 3 moderate average 2.50-3.49 2 disagree low 1.50-2.49 1 strongly disagree very low 1.00-1.49 One-way ANOVA shown that there is no significant difference found amount in the three skills; grammar, listening and reading. There was no significant difference in proficiency, (F(2,147) = 0.36, p = 0.69) Sex Versus English Skills Performance No difference was found in Grammar score test based on sex of respondents. There was no significant effect for gender, (t(.72) =29.56, p=.47.) In the same way, there was no difference found in Listening score test based on sex. There was no significant effect for gender, (t(.62) =24.98, p=.53.) And, no difference was found in Reading score test based on sex. There was no significant effect for gender, (t(.03) =18.06, p=.97.) Age Versus English Skills Performance No difference was found in Grammar score test based on age of respondents. There was no significant Grammar score test based on age, (F(3,46) = .24, p = .86.) In the same way, there was no difference found in Listening score test based on age.

26 There was no significant Listening score test based on age, (F(3,46) = .35, p = .78.) And, no difference was found in Reading score test based on age. There was no significant reading score test based on age, (F(3,46) = 2.48, p = .07.) Major Versus English Skills Performance No difference was found in Grammar score test based on major of respondents. There was no significant main effect for major, (F(2,47) = 2.00, p = .14.) In the same way, there was no difference found in Listening score test based on major. There was no significant main effect for major, (F(2,47) = 1.29, p = .28.) And, no difference was found in Reading score test based on major. There was no significant main effect for major, (F(2,47) = 2.98, p = .06.) Degree Versus English Skills Performance No difference was found in Grammar score test based on degree of respondents. There was no significant main effect for degree, (F(1,48) = .01, p = .93.). In the same way, there was no difference found in Listening score test based on degree. There was no significant main effect for degree, (F(1,48) = 0, p = .10.) And, no difference was found in Reading score test based on degree. There was no significant main effect for degree, (F(1,48) = .36, p = .55.) Major Versus Motivation to Learn English There was a significant degree of motivation was found. Levene’s test indicated unequal variances (F = 4.89, p = .012). The result shown that Business major and English major were more motivated to learn English. See the figures below.

27 English Proficiency Versus Motivation to Learn English A significant statistical result between English performance and motivation to learn English was found. (F(3,46) = 2.82, p < 0.5) EP in grammar had negative relationship. EP in reading and listening had positive relationship as shown in the figure below. Table 2. Major Versus Motivation to Learn English Figure 2 Degree Versus English Skills Performance

28 Table 3. Degree Versus English Skills Performance

29 CHAPTER 5 DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION Students’ English Proficiency and Motivation at AIU Thai program measured the motivation of Thai program students majoring in Nursing, Business and English at AIU, Saraburi Province, Thailand, and the connection between the students’ learning motivation and their English proficiency in grammar, listening and reading skills. Student who has had opportunity to attend international university, if one is motivated to learn English, he/she may have a good English proficiency. A discussion of the result findings and conclusion of the study follows. The EF English Proficiency Index (EF EPI), an English Proficiency System, taken by the participants all over the world by 88 countries including Thailand. Every year they report scores, levels, and rankings. The report of the EF EPI in 2018 the score for Thailand was 48.54, consider as a low proficiency level and ranking Thailand as 64 out of the 88 counties worldwide, and 16th out of 21 for Asian countries. AIU Thai student respondents' English performance score was 49.13%. This means AIU students performed marginally better than EF EPI 2018 of Thailand. This could be attributed to the learning environment at AIU which enables its students to learn English better. Of the scores of each skill—grammar, reading and listening—the score of grammar is the highest score at 50.8% followed by listening skill, 48.7% and reading skill at 47.9. This would indicate that Thai people are better at grammar skills than the other skills. It is important to note that grammar skills are basic to English comprehension- It can be likened to a good seed which when grown and nurtured will

30 produce a sweet fruit. As ESL teachers, we should nurture this seed of grammar to enable higher English language skills in the student’s daily life and ensure better career prospects. There is no difference in a students’ grammar proficiency base on demographic variables gender, age, major and degree. Nor is there any difference in a students’ listening proficiency base on demographic variables gender, age, major and degree. And there is also no difference in a students’ reading proficiency base on demographic variables gender, age, major and degree as well. So, I conclude that the gender, age, major and degree do not have any effect to their English performance at all. Rather, it must be depending on their motivation. Remarkably, that the correlation between motivation and English proficiency of the respondents were not statistically significant in general for this group of respondents. However, other studies revealed that the correlation between motivation and English proficiency of the respondents was statistically significant in some way. The disparity could be that, the sample group of this study is difference from others, in that the sample group of other studies were students in classes at the time they have been administered the test and hence were aware and prepared. But the sample group of this study did not know that they will be given the test. This means that those who performed well in this test have good English skills whether they would have motivation or not. In addition, this study found that English majors and Business majors were more motivated than Nursing majors. It stands to reason that English majors are motivated to learn English because they take English as their major. What was interesting was Business majors that were more motivated than Nursing students. The explanation would be that in this information technology era, business students need

31 to be keeping up with their English skills to deal with function in international surrounding like collages, with customers from varied backgrounds and with modern communication tools. I am glad that we can see this trend happen in AIU Business students’ majors. When they graduate from AIU with their Diploma displaying “international university”, when there is a need to deal with a foreigner at a work place, this task can be assigned to the AIU graduate first. They must be prompt in coming forward and meeting the challenge. Teachers and researchers need not just motivate the student to learn by instrumental motivation, rather motivate the student to learn by integrative motivation in this way it will become their own skills and by their skills they will perform well in English proficiency no matter they will have high motivation or not.

32 REFERENCE Alizadeh, M. (2016) The Impact of Motivation on English Language Learning. Islamic Azad Uiversity, Lahijan, Iran. Best, J.W. (1981) Research in Education, 5th ed. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall. Brown, H. D. (2000) Principles of language learning and teaching. New Jersey: Prentice Hall. Choomthong, D. and Chaichompoo, Ch. (2015) English language learning motivation of Thai undergraduate students in the globalized era. Suranaree J. Soc. Sci. 9 (2), (23-45). Retrieved from https://so05.tcithaijo.org/index.php/sjss/article/view/45134/37350 Degang, M. (2010) Motivation toward English language learning of the second year undergraduate Thai students majoring in Business English at an Englishmedium university. Master’s project. Bangkok: Graduate School, Srinakharinwirot University. Retrieved from http://thesis.swu.ac.th/swuthesis/Bus_Eng_Int_Com/Manusak_D.pdf Dornyei, Z. and Otto, I. (1998). Motivation in action: A process model of L2 motivation. Working papers in applied linguistics. 4, 43-69. London: Thames Valley University. Dornyei, Z. (2001) Teaching and Researching Motivation. UK, Harlow: Pearson Education.

33 Dornyei, Z. (2002) Motivational strategies in the language classroom. Cambridge: University Press. Donryei, Z., K. Csizer, and N. Nemeth. (2006) Motivation, Language attitudes and globalization: Hungarian perspective. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. Dorkchandra, D. (2010) Enhancing English reading comprehension through a text structure reading strategy call program. Retrieved from http://sutir.sut.ac.th:8080/sutir/bitstream/123456789/3708/2/fulltext.pdf Ellis, R. (1997) Second language acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Elyildirim, S. & Ashton, S. (2006) Creating positive attitudes towards English as a foreign language. English Teaching Forum. 44 (4), 2-11. English First (2017). EF English Proficiency Index: The World’s largest ranking of countries and regions by English skills. Retrieved from https://www.ef.co.th/epi/ Gardner, R.C. (1985) Social psychology and second language learning: The role of attitudes and motivation. London: Edward Arnold Publishers. Harris, T. L. & Hodges, R. E. (1995). The literacy dictionary: The vocabulary of reading and writing. Retrieved from https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED385820 Hosenfeld, C. (1979) A learning‐teaching view of second language instruction: Foreign language annals.12 (1), 51-54. Retrieved from https://kopernio.com/viewer?doi=10.1111%2Fj.1944- 9720.1979.tb00949.x&token=WzE1Mzg3ODYsIjEwLjExMTEvai4xOTQ0LT

34 k3MjAuMTk3OS50YjAwOTQ5LngiXQ.5lqq83XogwDhHB5J8FDYpcqS3D E Kitao, K. (1990). A study of Japanese and American perceptions of politeness in requests. Doshisha Studies in English, 50, 178-210 Kitjaroonchai, N., & Kitjaroonchai, T. (2012). Motivation toward English language learning of Thai student majoring in English at Asia-Pacific International University. Catalyst, 7(1), 21-38. Kyriacou, C. (2005) English pupil’s attitudes towards learning French. Paper presented at the 11th European conference for research on learning and instruction, August 23-27, at the University of Cyprus, Nicosia, Cyprus. Kyriacou, C. and Zhu, D. (2008) Shanghai pupil’s motivation towards learning English and the perceived influence of important others. Educational studies. Vol. 34, No. 2, May 2008, 97-104. Lamb, M. (2004) Integrative motivation in a globalizing world. System 32(1): 3-19. Mendelsohn, D. (1998). Teaching Listening. Annual review of applied linguistics 18:81-101 Nordquist, R. (2019, July 03). An introduction to theoretical grammar. Retrieved from https://www.thoughtco.com/theoretical-grammar-1692541 O'Malley, J. M. & A. U. Chamot (1990). Learning strategies in second language acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

35 Rumelhart, D.E. (1977). Toward an interactive model of reading. In S. Dornic and P. Rabbitt (Eds.), Attention and Performance (pp. 573-603). New York: Academic Press. Retrieved from https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/5828/f6e9baf5727e37968a43957e6b9405e68 87a.pdf Rumelhart, E.E. (2004). Toward an interactive model of reading. In R.B. Ruddell and N.J. Urnau (Eds.), Theoretical models and processes of reading (5th Ed., pp. 1149-1179). Newark, DE: International Reading Association. Spolsky, B. (2000) Anniversary article: Language motivation revisited. Applied Linguistics 21 (2): 157-169. Techavijit, V. (2007) The international schools’ phenomena in Thailand and the implementation of the International baccalaureate. Paper presented at the University of Oxford, May 1, 2007. Ushioda, E. (2006) Language motivation in a reconfigured Europe: Access, identity, autonomy. Journal of multilingual and multicultural development 27(2),148- 161. Vandergrift, L. (1997a). The strategies of second language (French) listeners: A descriptive study. Foreign language annals 30:387-409.