Enhancing Students’ Learning Motivation through Reflective Journal Writing

Abstract

The issue under study is topical and significant in modern pedagogics because it is related not only to the great role that motivation plays in the process of students’ learning a foreign language, but also a shortage of efficient motivational techniques enhancing this process used in class. Researchers state that among other factors influencing acquisition of knowledge the one of motivation is the most significant. The technique of keeping a Reflective Journal (RJ) has been worldwide used in teaching practice; however, in Russia it hasn’t been applied so widely. The article aims at studying the impact the use of RJ Writing has on enhancing students’ learning motivation. The study was conducted in Kazan State University where 30 upper-intermediate students learning English took part in the experiment. The methods used to explore the problem were literature review, experiment conducted in Kazan Federal University, questionnaires administered to students and their analysis. Results of the post-study questionnaire administered at the end of the course demonstrated a high level of students’ learning motivation. The findings showed that the RJ Writing, alongside with improving learning and increasing selfconfidence, enhanced students’ motivation. The article’s materials could be useful for university teachers interested in ways of enhancement of their students’ motivation, thus promoting their progress in studies.

Keywords: Motivation, Reflective Journal, motivational strategies, reflexive education

1. Introduction

2.Research methods

The main objective of the experiment was to consider the technique of RJW as an effective

instrument to improve language learning and enhance motivation in English language learners. In this

study 30 upper-intermediate students of Kazan Federal University participated. The experiment was

held within the frames of the Practical Grammar of the English language course.

During the experiment students were given the task to keep a structured RJ. It was previously

explained and proved that the structured type of RJ is a more preferable that the unstructured one

(Amirkhanova, 2014), so, the students were explained the aim of keeping the Journal and given

instructions and questions to follow.

In our experiment, we implemented the scheme (which we consider to be mostly suitable) of making

up questions for a Reflective Journal and implied it in teaching students of Foreign Languages

department. Starting from the second lesson and throughout the whole course, which lasts for two

semesters, the students were given three series of questions, the first one being ‘description of the

studied material’, which contains 5 questions of the type: ‘What new fact did I learn throughout this

week?’, ‘What’s my reaction to a particular topic in the lecture?’, the second one dealing with

‘evaluation of gained knowledge and understanding one’s own level’, containing questions of the type:

‘Do I understand what I have learnt?’, and the third series – ‘own attitude and behavior’ which can

include such questions as: ‘How can I make the strategy more effective?’, ‘What can I do to get a better

understanding?’. Depending on the content of the course the questions can vary, but the principle of

division into three series and their orientation onto the content of learning activity, its process and aims,

in our opinion, should be basic. The maximum grade for keeping RJ was 30% from the final semester

grade.

Two groups of upper intermediate students of approximately the same level took part in the

experiment. 15 experimental group students were asked to write the RJ according to all instructions

described above, while 15 students of the control group learned the same material without keeping the

RJ.

To describe perceptions of students and their motivation regarding RJ writing we used a 6-item

post-study questionnaires developed by M. Farrah (2012) based on a 5-point Likert test. The relative

agreement to the questionnaire items ranged from 1 (Strongly disagree) to 5 (Strongly agree). This

post-study questionnaire was administered at the end of the course.

The post-study questionnaire contained 6 questions dealing with intrinsic learning motivation: 1.

RJW helped me to talk about my experiences; 2. RJ writing helped me to express my ideas and

opinions; 3. RJW helped me to respond to my thoughts and feelings; 4. RJ writing enhanced my

communication skills; 5. Frequent JJW increased my creativity; 6. RJW motivated me to write more).

3.Findings

As the result, the students of experimental group demonstrated excellent results at the final test and

the exam: 53.3% of students got grade 5 (compared to 40% of students of control group), 40% got

grade 4 (compared to 40% of control group) and 6.6% got grade 3 (compared to 20% of control group).

Grades for the exam which was taken at the end of the course generally corresponded to the grades

which students got for the final test. The average score in the experimental group was 4.46, in the

control group – 4.2.

The post-study questionnaire contained 6 questions answers to which were rated 4.65; 4.46; 4.39;

4.05; 4.05; 4.42 correspondingly. The results demonstrated a high level of motivation, which means

that RJ writing helps enhance learner’s intrinsic motivation.

4.Discussion

The study showed that RJW is successful in promoting students’ intrinsic motivation on English

writing, their self-confidence and initiative in English writing, which is consistent with previous studies

(Estrada, 2014), (Liao, MT& Wong, CT. 2007). Moreover, we strongly believe that RJW develops not

only intrinsic but also extrinsic motivation, because RJ contributes to students’ goal-orientedness. All

the above stated makes us assert the RJ technique enhances such main components of motivational

teaching practice as creating initial motivation, maintaining and protection of motivation and

encouraging positive self-evaluation because RJ technique provides increasing both the learners’

expectancy of success and goal-orientedness, creating realistic learner beliefs, creating a pleasant and

supportive atmosphere and establishing rapport with the students, promoting ideal forms of interaction

between the teacher and learners, can help avoid stress and the level of anxiety, provides

encouragement of learners and a constant feedback and personal attention form a teacher, makes

learning stimulating, increases learners’ self-esteem, creates learners’ autonmy, increases learner’

interest and involvement in tasks, stimulates motivationally appropriate feedback. All these show high

motivational potential of RJ writing.

Alongside with the above stated, the findings are consistent with the researchers view that learning

is enhanced through keeping a RJ, thus itself being a strong motivational factor. Dyment and

O’Connell suggest that making sure that the expectations of a RJW are clear is an enabling factor. They

state that in addition to making the purpose of the RJW transparent, it should also be made clear (a)

how the journal fits into the overall program of study, (b) who will read the journal, (c) what the

assessment criteria are and how much the Journal will count, and (d) what the specific requirements are

(Dyment & O’Connell, 2010).

Conclusion

RJW technique possesses great value for university teachers. It gives students a chance for deeper

understanding of aims of their own learning activities, for analyzing and correcting the process of

knowledge acquisition, good level of preparation for written works and tests; moreover, RJW has a

positive impact on motivation, letting students distinctly realize why they need the material they are

learning, and can be considered an important part of motivational strategies model. Besides, both

extrinsic and intrinsic motivation types are engaged in this technique. To make the implementation of

RJ efficient, a teacher should follow certain rules, as to choose the structured type of the Journal, check

it up systematically, provide regular feedback to learners, state clearly the demands for its writing,

establish trust-based relationships with students and carefully organize students’ work in keeping a RJ.

References

• Amirkhanova, K.M. (2014). ‘Reflective journal writing in formation of reflective thinking of undergraduates learning English’, Philology and Culture, 1: 264-269.

• Cook, V. (2000). Linguistics and second language acquisition. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press and Macmillan Publishers Ltd.

• Cook, V. (2000b). Second language learning and language teaching. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press and Edward Arnold (Publishers) Limited.

• Crookes, G. & Schmidt, R.W. (1991), ‘Motivation: reopening the research agenda’, Language Learning, 41, 4: 469-512.

• Dyment, J.E. & O’Connell, T.S. (2010). ‘The quality of reflection in student journals: A review of limiting and enabling factors’. Website: http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10755-010-9143-y#/page-1, (accessed on 17.01.2016)

• Farrah, M. (2012). ‘Reflective journal writing as an effective technique in the writing process”, An-Najah University J. Res. (Humanities), vol.26, no.4: 997- 1024. Website: https://www.academia.edu (accessed on 2.02. 2016)

• Estrada F. E. and Abdul Rahman, M. (2014). ‘Reflective Journal Writing as an Approach to Enhancing Students’ Learning Experience’. Website: http://www.itb.edu.bn/gsr/bdjtc/BDJTC%202014/ P03.pdf (accessed on 13.1.2016).

• Harmer, J. (1991). ‘The practice of English Language Teaching’. London: Longman, 371.

• Keller, J. M. (1983). ‘Motivational design of instruction’. In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional design theories and models: An overview of their current status : 383–433. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

• Lear, E. (2013). ‘Using guided reflective journals in large classes: Motivating students to independently improve pronunciation’. Asian EFL Journal, Sep 2013, Vol. 15, Issue 3: 113 – 137

• Liao, MT& Wong, C.T. (2007). ‘Effect of Journals on L2 Students Writing Fluency, Reflexion, Anxiety and Motivation’. Reflection of English Language Teaching, 9(2): 139-170.

• Maslow, A. (1987). Motivation and personality’. 3rd ed., revised by R. Frager, J. Fadiman, C. McReynolds, & R. Cox ed. New York: Harper & Row.

• Owens, R. G. (1987). ‘Organizational behavior in education’. 3rd Ed. Englewood Cliffs: NJ: Prentice-Hall, 196.

• Pintrich, P. and Schunk, D. (1996). ‘Motivation in Education: Theory, Research & Applications’, Ch. 3. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

• Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). ‘Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: Classic definitions and new directions’. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 54-67.

• Reeve, J. (1993). The face of interest. Motivation and Emotion, 1, 353-375.

• Walker, S. (2006.) ‘Journal writing as a Teaching Technique to Promote Reflection’. Journal of Athletic Training. 41(2), 216-221.

• Williams, M. and Burden, R. (1997). Psychology for language teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 224.

• Young, M. (2014). The Motivational Effects of the Classroom Environment in Facilitating Self-Regulated Learning. Journal of Marketing Education. April 2005, 27, 25-40.