Hossein Rahmanpanah is Assistant Professor of TEFL at Islamic Azad University-South Tehran Branch, Iran. His main areas of interests are self-determination theory, SLA theories and concepts, materials development, and curriculum design. Email: Hossein_2003@hotmail.com Milad Haji Abdolmajid, Iran

Milad Haji Abdolmajid, holding MA in TEFL, is graduated from Islamic Azad University- South Tehran Branch. His main areas of research and interests in SLA are writing skill, language motivation, and classroom research.  Email: Milad_hope@yahoo.com

 

Abstract

Deci and Ryan’s (1985) self-determination theory (SDT) suggests a unique view for understating how autonomy supportive teaching style can promote self-determined/autonomous motivational regulations through supporting the basic psychological needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness. Therefore, this study sought to explore the effects of autonomy-supportive teaching style on EFL learners’ psychological needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness as well as different subscales of motivational regulations within self-determination theory. The subjects (N=40) were a group of English as a foreign language (EFL) learners who were doing their bachelor’s degree in Islamic Azad University-South Tehran Branch.  The Psychological Needs Satisfaction Questionnaire (Wilson et al., 2006) was used to measure participants’ perceptions of autonomy, competence, and relatedness. Also, Behavioral Regulation Questionnaire (Markland & Tobin, 2004) was used to measure the motivational regulations within self-determination theory. The results indicated that the psychological needs for competence, autonomy, and relatedness and more self-determined/autonomous (intrinsic and identified) motivational regulations were greater after the completion of instructional intervention. Moreover, the results indicated that the correlation between competence, autonomy, and relatedness with more self-determined/autonomous motivational regulations were higher than the other remaining correlational patterns. Collectively, the findings indicated that autonomy-supportive teaching style facilitates an internal locus of causality and enhances the feelings of autonomy and consequently promotes self-determined/ autonomous forms of motivational regulations among EFL learners. This study suggests that self-determination theory has strong implications in L2 learning as the more internalized the reason for second language learning, the more self-determined and autonomously motivated the learners will be. 

 

Introduction

Self-determination theory accounts for the quality of motivation regulating behavior as well as the processes that facilitate motivational development. This holds considerable appeal for understanding why people initiate, persist, and terminate their involvement in various physical activities (Deci & Ryan, 2002). Self-determination theory (SDT) is an organismic-dialectic metatheory that explains the ongoing challenges faced by humans in terms of assimilating and adapting to social environments. Deci and Ryan’s (1985) self-determination theory assumes that humans are active organisms who are oriented toward developing and refining their capabilities by interacting with the physical and social environment, seeking out opportunities for choice, interpersonal connection, and integrating their ongoing experiences. However, at the same time they might be vulnerable to control and passivity and may come to rely primarily on external influences for direction when conditions are not supportive of their innate tendencies toward growth (Niemiec, Ryan, & Brown, 2008).

Moreover, self-determination theory also asserts that behavior might arise from sources external to their sense of self such as social pressures. Self-determination theory suggests that it is the design of the human organism to engage interesting activities, to exercise capacities, and to involve connectedness in social groups (Deci & Ryan, 2000). Ryan and Niemiec (2009) state that self-determination theory focuses on human freedom as well as the association between our tendencies toward active growth and realization of potentials for  social, economic, and cultural supports. Markland, Ryan, Tobin, and Rollnick (2005) argue that self-determination theory is based on the existence of dialectical relation between our natural processes toward intrinsically motivated activity.

Deci and Ryan (1991) believe that autonomous behaviors derive from the person’s integrated sense of self while controlled behaviors are experienced as being pressured by interpersonal contingencies or demands. Deci and Ryan’s (1985) self-determination theory proposes that regulations exist within a self-determination continuum and specifies the psychological nutriments responsible for motivational development. Under the tenets of self-determination theory, social contexts that satisfy the psychological needs for competence, autonomy, and relatedness nurture the development of more self-determined regulations, which in turn support task persistence and psychological well-being (Ryan & Deci, 2000). However, the effect of autonomy-supportive teaching style on learners has received little attention in EFL context. To address this lack, this study is an attempt to explore the impact of autonomy-supportive teaching style within self-determination theory on developing psychological needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness as well as motivational subscales within SDT. 

 

Literature review

Self-determination Theory

According to Deci and Ryan (2000), self-determination theory as an organismic-dialectic framework of motivation is based on the tenet that humans are always actively searching for optimal challenges and new experience in the life. In other words, self-determination theory assumes that humans are active organisms who are oriented toward developing their capabilities by interacting with the social environment. Self-determination theory suggests that it is part of the adaptive design of the human organism to engage interesting activities, to exercise capacities, to pursue connectedness in social groups, and to integrate intrapsychic and interpersonal experiences into a relative unity (Deci & Ryan, 2000). The natural processes such as intrinsic motivation, integration of extrinsic regulations, and movement toward well-being are theorized to operate optimally only to the extent that the individual has sufficient inner resources to find or construct the necessary nourishment. Deci and Ryan’s self-determination theory maintains that a full understanding of goal-directed behavior, psychological development, and well-being cannot be achieved without addressing the psychological needs for competence, relatedness, and autonomy. The approach to these psychological needs embraced by self-determination theory is that social environments that fail to satisfy innate psychological needs contribute to alienation and block human development although social contexts that fulfill innate psychological needs promote well-being (Deci & Ryan, 1985; Ryan & Deci, 2002).

Deci and Ryan’s (2000) self-determination theory suggests that motivated behaviors vary in the degree to which they are autonomous versus controlled. Behaviors that are autonomous have an internal perceived locus of causality as they are experienced as being volitional, and are performed out of interest or personal importance. Autonomous behaviors emanate from one’s integrated sense of self. In contrast, controlled behaviors have an external perceived locus of causality and are experienced as being pressured by interpersonal demands (Deci & Ryan 1991; Grolnick, Deci, & Ryan, 1994; Vansteenkisten, Lens, & Deci, 2006).

Moreover, Deci, and Ryan’s (2000) self-determination theory suggests that autonomy-supportive contexts maintain or enhance intrinsic motivation and promote identification with external regulations, while controlling contexts tend to undermine intrinsic motivation. In educational settings, the concept of autonomy-supportive teaching style means that the teacher takes the learners’ perspective, acknowledges their feelings, and provides them with information and opportunities for choice, while reducing the use of pressures and demands (Black & Deci, 2000; Deci, Hodges, Pierson, & Tomassone, 1992; Grolnick, Ryan, & Deci, 1991; Patrick & Williams, 2009)

 

Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivation within Self-determination Theory

The concept of intrinsic/autonomous motivation is described as behavior that occur independent of any reinforcement contingencies. According to Deci (1975), intrinsic motivation is defined as the engagement in an activity for its own sake; that is to say, a learner who is intrinsically motivated is doing an activity for the sense of satisfaction and enjoyment experienced during the course of the activity itself.

A number of studies (Deci, 1971; Ryan, 1982) indicate that extrinsic motivation does not necessarily undermine intrinsic motivation. This, in fact, leads to the postulation that intrinsic and extrinsic motivations are not completely pole apart. Deci and Ryan (1995) argue that while intrinsically motivated actions are self-determined, extrinsically motivated behaviors vary in their degree of self-determination, having either a relatively internal or a relatively external perceived locus of causality. Nevertheless, intrinsically motivated behaviors are not energized by physiological drives or their derivatives. In other words, intrinsic/autonomous motivation represents engagement in an activity for its own sake.

Ryan and Deci (2000) state that studies on self-determination theory are concerned primarily with investigating the quality of learners’ motivation. Quality of motivation refers to the type or kind of motivation that underlies learning behavior and contrasts with the quantity or amount of motivation that learners show for doing a particular learning activity. In Deci and Ryan’s (1985) self-determination theory, on the basis of quality or type of motivation, the most basic distinction is between intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. The concept of intrinsic motivation gained importance in reaction to Skinner’s (1953) operant theory. In contrast to Skinner’s operant theory, intrinsic motivation implies that voluntary behaviors are not all a function of operationally separable reinforcement. These reinforcement-independent behaviors are inherent in the nature of life, and the rewards for an intrinsically motivated activity are in the activity itself. Therefore, there exist no separable external rewards as the rewarding consequences are in pleasant activities. To put it more simply, in contrast to Skinner’s operant theory in which maintains that all behaviors are motivated by separable consequences such as money or food, intrinsic motivations are those in which the reward is in the activity itself.   In educational settings, learners who are intrinsically/autonomously motivated perform the activity to have the experience and interest, enjoyment, and satisfaction that accompany the behavior. In fact, these feeling of enjoyment derive from a sense of competence over a voluntarily chosen activity (Ryan & Deci, 2000). Extrinsically motivated behaviors are those actions that are carried out to achieve some instrumental rewards or to avoid punishments. As Ryan and Deci state, extrinsic motivation is a construct that pertains whenever an activity is done to attain some separable outcome. Hence, extrinsic motivation refers to doing an activity simply to achieve an instrumental value.

                                  

As it is illustrated in Figure 1, with respect to the degree of self-determination, extrinsic motivations can be classified into external, introjected, identified, and integrated regulations. According to Deci and Ryan (1985), the least type of extrinsic motivation is external regulation. These behaviors that are performed to satisfy an external demand or obtain an externally imposed reward are labeled externally regulated behaviors. Every individual learner typically experiences externally regulated behaviors when his or her behaviors have an external perceived locus of causality. In other words, external regulation refers to those behaviors that are determined through means external to the individual such as tangible rewards or punishment.      In language learning domain, the learner who works hard to learn a second language exclusively for the purpose of acquiring a course credit or gaining a teacher’s praise is considered as an externally regulated one. In other words, the learner who is externally regulated learns the L2 because of the existence of contingency in the environment such as gaining a reward (Noels, Clement, & Pelletier, 1999).

Introjected regulation is the second type of extrinsic motivation. Introjections describes a type of internal regulation that is controlling as learners perform behaviors to avoid anxiety (Deci & Ryan, 2000). Hence, introjected regulation is more internalized but it is still extrinsic since the learners are not performing the task for its inherent enjoyment (Deci & Ryan, 2000). In second language learning, we can refer to a learner who does his or her second language homework because he or she would feel guilty if it were not completed or a learner who makes an attempt to learn his or her assignment to impress the others with his language proficiency. Moreover, those learners who learn L2 to avoid the feelings of embarrassment or to gain respect from the others possess introjected regulation (Noels et al., 1999).

A more autonomous form of extrinsic motivation is regulation through identification. The activity is incorporated into the self-concept, and the individual does the activity as it is consistent with what he or she values (Deci & Ryan, 1995). To illustrate, a learner who feels that being culturally sensitive is important possesses positive views about language learning since he believes it helps him support this valued goal. Also, a learner with an identified regulation tends to learn the L2 because it is useful for achieving another important goals such as becoming a good teacher or a counselor. While identified regulation is self-determined, it is still extrinsic as the behavior is done for its presumed instrumental value with respect to some outcome that is separate from the behavior. Therefore, Deci and Ryan (2000) believe that intrinsic motivation is a prototype of self-determined activity but this does not imply that extrinsic regulation can be transformed into intrinsic motivation.

The most autonomous form of extrinsic motivation is integrated regulation. Integration occurs when identified regulations have been fully assimilated into the self. Ryan and Deci (2000) believe that integrated forms of motivation are similar to intrinsic motivation as they are both autonomous. Nevertheless, integrated forms of motivation are still extrinsic because the behavior which is motivated by integrated regulation is done for its instrumental value with respect to some outcome that is separate from the behavior even though it is volitional (Deci & Ryan, 2008). In other words, integrated regulation is similar to intrinsic motivation as it is fully governed by the self. However, contrary to intrinsic motivation, the activity is not done because of enjoyment in it but because it is viewed as an aspect of self-concept. In language learning, a learner might consider himself to be capable of traveling freely across cultural boundaries and consequently he might see competence in a second language as an inherent part of his self-concept (Noels, 2001).   

As it is illustrated in Figure 1, amotivation is the state of lacking an intention to act. As Deci and Ryan (2000) state, when amotivated, a learner’s behavior lacks intentionality and a sense of personal causation. Hence, the learners are described as amotivated when they believe there is no link between their actions and the outcomes as the results arise from the factors beyond their control. In such a situation, the learners have no intrinsic and extrinsic reasons for performing the activity such as learning and they are expected to give up the learning as soon as possible. In fact, a person who is amotivated does not see any value in the activity he performs or he does not believe in the desired outcome. Therefore, he might stop performing the task as he does not feel to be competent (Deci, 1975; Ryan, 1995; Rigby, Deci, Patrick, & Ryan, 1992).

 

Research on Self-determination Theory

A plethora of studies have indicated that learners who have more self-determined forms of motivation for doing their assignments are more likely to stay in school than the learners who have less self-determined motivation (Vallerand, 1997; Black & Deci, 2000; Reeve, 2006).

According to Ryan and Connell (1989), achievement behaviors such as doing homework among elementary school children are associated with different types of motivations. To illustrate, the more the learners are externally regulated, the less they show interest, value, or effort and the more they tend to blame their teachers for negative outcomes. Moreover, Ryan and Connell’s (1989) investigation illustrates that identified regulation is associated with greater enjoyment of school and also intrinsic motivation correlates with interest, enjoyment, and great competence and positive coping styles.

Research by Ryan, Connell, and Plant (1990) indicates that there is a positive correlation between the learners’ interest and enjoyment in the material and the learners’ self-reported comprehension. In a study to investigate the relation between autonomy and learning, Grolnik and Ryan (1987) collected data on the reasons for doing assignment among school students. The results indicated that, when the learners reported more autonomous reasons such as identified and intrinsic reasons for doing  their school work, they indicated higher-quality learning than when they reported less autonomous reasons such as external and introjected reasons. Moreover, several other studies provide evidence that self-determined forms of motivation are related to enhanced learning. Research by Vallerand and Bissonette (1992) indicates that the more controlling forms of motivation such as external regulation and introjected regulation are positively connected with dropping out of school, while the more autonomous forms such as intrinsic motivation is negatively correlated with being dropped out. Furthermore, Ryan and Connell (1989) state that identified regulation is positively correlated with the students’ interest, enjoyment of school, and positive coping styles, whereas introjection is positively correlated with anxiety in school and weak coping styles with failure. Besides, many more studies indicate that the learning contexts that support competence and autonomy are predicted to promote intrinsic motivation and higher-quality learning (Plant & Ryan, 1985; Ryan, Koestner, & Deci, 1991). Therefore, learners with higher intrinsic motivation and identified regulation have shown to have more positive emotions in the classroom, more enjoyment of academic work, and more satisfaction with their learning and education (Ryan & Connell, 1989; Vallerand, 1989).

In educational settings, numerous studies have confirmed that autonomy-supportive teaching style promote greater autonomous/self-determined (intrinsic and identified) motivational regulations and internalization, while those factors that leave the learners controlled reduce intrinsic motivation and internalization (Edmunds, Ntoumanis, & Duda, 2006; Markland, 1999; McDonough & Crocker, 2007). The pressure created by the inducements causes a shift in the perceived locus of causality from internal to external. In other words, motivational strategies such as rewards undermine autonomy and thus lead to non-optimal outcomes such as decreased intrinsic motivation, less creativity, and poor problem solving (Black & Deci, 2000; Markland, Ryan, Tobin, & Rollnick, 2005). On the contrary, the offer of choice and volition presents encouragements for individual autonomy and facilitates a shift in the perceived locus of causality from external to internal (Deci, Ryan, & Williams, 1996; Ryan & Solky, 1996). Research conducted by Deci, Schwartz, Sheinman, and Ryan (1981) indicates that teachers always motivate the learning process in an autonomy-supportive climate. In other words, the learners in classroom with more autonomy-supportive teachers display greater curiosity and higher self-esteem than the learners in classrooms with more controlling teachers. 

A plethora of studies have applied the paradigm of self-determination theory in educational settings and they all indicate that autonomy-supportive teaching style, as it is described in self-determination theory, develops learners’ autonomous/self-determined motivational regulations and basic psychological needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness (Deci, Schwartz, Sheinman, & Ryan, 1981; Grolnick & Ryan, 1989; Grolnick, Ryan, & Deci, 1991; Ryan & Grolnick, 1986). Although many studies are conducted on the applications of autonomy-supportive climate, as described in self-determination theory, to developing the psychological needs for autonomy, competence and relatedness in different fields, the number of studies in language learning is scarce (Noels, 2001, 2005; Noels, Clement, & Pelletier, 1999). Therefore, this study provides evidence on this issue that autonomy- supportive teaching style, as described in self-determination theory increases EFL learners’ psychological needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness as well as their  autonomous/self-determined motivational regulations.

Moreover, the impacts of autonomy-supportive climate on developing psychological needs for autonomy, competence, relatedness and more autonomous/self-determined (intrinsic and identified) motivational regulations are investigated in other disciplines (Wilson & Rogers, 2002, 2008; Wilson, Rogers, & Fraser, 2002) but the number of studies in language learning is scarce.

 

Purpose of the study

To address the gap in the literature, this study investigated the impacts of autonomy-supportive teaching style on developing EFL learners’ psychological needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness as well as more autonomous/self-determined (intrinsic and identified) motivational regulations. Therefore, it was hypothesized that the psychological needs for autonomy, competence, relatedness, and more autonomous/ self-determined (intrinsic and identified) motivational regulations would be greater after the completion of SDT-focused instructional intervention. Moreover, this study investigated the relationship between autonomy, competence, relatedness, and more autonomous/self-determined (intrinsic and identified) motivational regulations. In other words, it was hypothesized that greater satisfaction of psychological needs would correlate positively with more autonomous/self-determined (intrinsic and identified) motivational regulations. Hence, this study aimed to answer the following research questions:

1. Does autonomy-supportive teaching style, as described in Deci and Ryan’s (1985) self-determination theory, have any impact on developing the psychological needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness as well as more autonomous/self-determined motivational regulations among EFL learners?

2. Is there any correlation among autonomy, competence, and relatedness as well as more autonomous/self-determined (intrinsic and identified) motivational regulations?  

 

Method

Participants

The researcher collected and analyzed the data from a sample group (N=40) of both males

and females EFL learners, ranging in age from 18 to 24 years. The participants assigned to intervention program in this study were selected through administering Oxford Placement Test (Allan, 1992) to a group of 52 EFL learners. Those participants whose scores on the test were one SD above and one SD below the mean were selected. Moreover, all the participants were doing their B.A. degree in an English Language Teaching Program in Islamic Azad University- South Tehran Branch.

 

Instruments

In this study, the adapted version of Psychological Need Satisfaction (Wilson, Rogers, Rodgers, & Wild, 2006) was used to measure the participants’ perceptions of autonomy, competence, and relatedness during the whole instructional intervention. The Psychological Needs Satisfaction (PNS) is a 7-point Likert scaling (1=Not al all true to 7=Very true), including 18 items. This questionnaire has the three subscales of autonomy, competence, and relatedness, each including 6 items. According to Wilson et al., (2006), the reliabilities for the three subscales of autonomy, competence, and relatedness are 0.80, 0.80, and 0.81 respectively.

Moreover, the adapted version of Behavioral Regulation Questionnaire (Markland & Tobin, 2004) was used to measure the participants’ motivational regulations within self-determination

Theory. This is 5-point Likert scaling questionnaire (1= Not true for me to 5= Very true for me), including 19 items. The Behavioral Regulation Questionnaire (BRQ) contains five subscales that measure amotivation, external, introjected,  identified, and intrinsic motivational regulations of the participants. As reported in Markland and Tobin (2006), the reliabilities for the subscales of amotivation, external, introjected, identified, and intrinsic regulations are 0.89, 0.89, 0.90, 0.91 and 0.91, respectively.

 

Data collection procedure

To determine the impacts of autonomy-supportive teaching style, as described in self-determination theory, on psychological need satisfaction as well as autonomous/ intrinsic motivation in learners, the subjects benefitted from an instructional intervention, including 16 weekly sessions. To manipulate the teaching style to create an autonomy-supportive environment, the researchers applied Wu’s (2003) autonomy-supportive teaching method, which is based on Black and Deci’s (2000) autonomy-supportive framework within SDT. Table 1 shows the teaching method applied to the participants assigned to SDT-focused intervention program.

Moreover, all the participants were asked to complete the questionnaires two times at the beginning and after the completion of the instructional intervention.

 

Data Analysis

Behavioral Regulation Questionnaire was administered among the subjects prior to and after the completion of the instructional intervention to  document the impacts of autonomy- supportive teaching style within SDT on the subjects’ motivational regulations. Then, paired t- test was run between the subscales of Behavioral Regulation Questionnaire.  

Also, Psychological Needs satisfaction questionnaire was administered among the subjects two times, prior to and after the completion of the instructional intervention. Then, paired t-test was run between the subscales of Psychological Needs Satisfaction questionnaire. Moreover, to investigate the correlation among autonomy, competence, and relatedness as well as more autonomous/self-determined (intrinsic and identified) motivational regulations, correlational data analysis was computed among Psychological Needs Satisfaction and Behavioral Regulation Questionnaire subscales after the completion of the instruction.

 

Results and Discussion  

As it was stated earlier, paired t-test data analysis was run between the data collected from the Behavioral Regulation Questionnaire. The results of descriptive statistics are reported in Table 2.

As Table 2 displays, the means of identified and intrinsic subscales were 7.00 (SD= 1.68) and 7.23 (SD= 2.11) prior to SDT-focused intervention program, while it increased to16.55 (SD= 2.56)  and 17.30 (SD=1.80) after the completion of the instruction.

However, the external and introjected subscales also increased after the completion of the instruction. The means of external and introjected regulations were 5.55 (SD=1.37) and 6.50 (SD=1.64) at Time 1 or prior to the SDT-focused intervention program, while they increased to 12.13 (SD=2.20) and 16.55 (SD=2.56) after the completion of the instruction or at Time 2. More specifically, the results indicated that an autonomy-supportive teaching style within self-determination theory enhanced self-determined or autonomous forms of regulation (intrinsic and identified).

However, the results showed  that the mean for the amotivation subscale declined after the completion of the SDT-focused intervention program. As it is illustrated in Table 2, amotivation had the mean of 15.03 (SD= 2.08 ) at Time 1, while it had the mean of 5.35 (SD= 1.35) after the

completion of the SDT-focused intervention program. Therefore, the results were in harmony with arguments put forth by Deci and Ryan (2002).

Moreover, paired t-test data analysis was computed to determine the significance of difference. The results indicated that there is a statistically significant means score gain for autonomous/intrinsic subscale from Time 1 to Time 2:  t(39)=-23.336, p< .05. Moreover, there is a statistically significant mean score gain in identified regulation or more autonomous form of self-determination theory: t(39)=-16.264, p< .05. Also, descriptive statistics of the data collected from autonomy, competence and, relatedness were reported in Table 3.

The descriptive statistics reported in Table 3 indicates that autonomy, competence, and relatedness are greater after the completion of the SDT-focused intervention. The means for the subscales of autonomy, competence, and relatedness increased from 15.48 (SD= 3.96), 16.80 (SD= 4.99), and 15.23 (SD= 3.75) at Time 1 of administering the questionnaire to 38.30 (SD= 2.84), 38.42 (SD=2.87), and 38.13 (SD= 2.15) after the completion of the SDT-focused intervention program. Furthermore, paired t-test data analysis between the data collected from autonomy, competence and relatedness subscales to determine the significance of difference.  The results indicated that there is a statistically significant mean score gain in all three subscales of competence, autonomy and relatedness. Considering autonomy, the gain in mean score is 22.8 points. Therefore, autonomy subscale had statistically significant mean score gain from Time 1 to Time 2: t(39)=-38.875, p<.05. Therefore, the results were in harmony with arguments put forth by Deci and Ryan (1985, 2002) as autonomy-supportive teaching style within self-determination theory significantly enhanced EFL learners autonomous motivational regulations and psychological needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness.

In addition, correlational data analysis was computed among Psychological Need Satisfaction and Behavioral Regulation Questionnaire subscales after the completion of the instruction to investigate the relationship among autonomy, competence, and relatedness as well as more autonomous/self-determined (intrinsic and identified) motivational regulations. Table 4 reports the descriptive statistics.

As Table 4 displays, the distribution of the scores was examined for kurtosis and skewedness and it was found to be normal. Furthermore, the results of the correlational data analysis among the subscales of amotivation, external, introjected, identified, intrinsic, competence, autonomy, and relatedness are reported in Table 5.

As it is illustrated in Table 5, the magnitude of correlation between autonomy andcompetence is more than that of correlation between autonomy and relatedness as the former is 0.40 and the later is 0.36. Also, autonomy subscale correlates negatively with the two subscales of amotivation and external regulation as the magnitudes of their correlations are - 0.12 and -0.25 respectively. Correspondingly, competence and relatedness subscales also correlate negatively with amotivation. The magnitude of correlation between competence and amotivation is -.07 and relatedness and amotivation correlate negatively at 0.08. However, the results were in favor of association between autonomy and more self-determined /autonomous (identified and intrinsic) types of motivation. The correlation between autonomy and identified subscales was r=0.25 and also autonomy subscale correlated significantly with intrinsic motivation (r= 0.51).

Therefore, the results of this study are in line with the paradigm of Deci and Ryan’s (2000) self-determination theory as more autonomous motivational regulations correlated significantly with the psychological needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness among EFL learners, while amotivation did not associate with learners’ basic psychological needs for autonomy, competence and relatedness.

The results indicated that autonomy-supportive environment produces a direct effect on the L2 learning process. In other words, autonomy-supportive climate can be an indispensable supportive condition for the maintenance and development of competence, autonomy, and relatedness. According to Deci and Ryan (2000), learners experience autonomous motivation when their fundamental psychological needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness are satisfied. Similarly, the findings are in harmony with the argument of Ryan and Deci (2000) that optimal challenges, supportive feedback, and non-threatening relationship facilitate learners’ psychological needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness. The general pattern of correlations is consistent with the expected relations outlined in Deci and Ryan’s

(1985) SDT. Although amotivation did not associate with learners’ basic psychological needs for autonomy, competence and relatedness, more autonomous motivational (identified & intrinsic) regulations correlated significantly with the psychological needs for autonomy, competence and relatedness among EFL learners. Although the two subscales of identified and intrinsic regulations are distinct constructs, they are similar in that they did not correlate with amotivation.

The results indicate that the more participants feel they learn the language and the more they learn because they enjoy the learning process, the more effort they make and the more they intend to follow their studies.

The negative correlation between amotivation and the psychological needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness imply that the more the learners feel amotivated, the less autonomous and competent they will be. This pattern refers to the use of SDT for explaining the relationship between autonomous motivation and language learning outcomes. Deci and Ryan’s (1985) self-determination theory maintains that, when students’ basic psychological needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness are supported in the classroom, they are more likely to internalize their motivation to learn and to be more autonomously engaged in their studies. Students’ autonomy can be supported by teachers’ minimizing the salience of evaluative pressure and any sense of coercion in the classroom, as well as by maximizing students’ perceptions of having a voice and choice in those academic activities in which they are engaged.

The main purpose of this study was to explore the effects of autonomy-supportive teaching style on psychological needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness and the subscales of motivational regulations within self-determination theory. The descriptive statistics indicated that the psychological needs of participants were greater after the completion of the course. In other words, autonomy, competence, and relatedness were greater after the completion of the SDT- focused intervention program. Beyond this, this study supports the relationship between the psychological need satisfaction for competence, autonomy, and relatedness and motivational regulations within the framework of SDT (Deci & Ryan, 1985; Ryan & Deci, 2000). Also, further support was demonstrated through increases in competence, autonomy, and relatedness as well as identified and intrinsic motivational regulation among EFL learners.

Positive relationships between the psychological needs of competence, autonomy, an relatedness with more self-determined (identified and intrinsic) motivational regulations are consistent with the principles of Deci and Ryan’s (1985) self-determination theory.

Therefore, all the changes are congruent with arguments put forth by Deci and Ryan (1985, 2002). That is to say, the results of this study suggest that autonomy-supportive teaching style enhances the basic psychological needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness among EFL learners as they are major components of motivational regulations. The results of this study indicated that autonomy-supportive contexts support learners’ autonomy and facilitate self- determined or autonomous motivation while controlling contexts undermine autonomous motivation. Overall, the results of this study posit that second language or foreign language learners enhance their self-determined/autonomous motivation on condition that they are provided with an instruction which is based on self-determination theory paradigm.

 

Conclusions

Deci and Ryan’s (1985) self-determination theory has many applications to language learning classroom although its paradigm does not address language learning issue directly. Noels et al., (1999) indicated that perceptions of the teacher as autonomy-supportive and as providing informative feedback positively correlate with increased autonomous/intrinsic motivation in L2 learners. Moreover, Dörnyei (1994) believed that the teachers’ controlling style and the manner of presenting feedback in the classroom are associated with the learners’ motivation.

In a nutshell, the major conclusions drawn from this study are as follows:

• Autonomy-supportive environments nurture learners’ psychological needs and integrated values. 
• Through supporting autonomy in the classroom, language teachers promote autonomous/ intrinsic motivation by understanding the learners’ perspectives, supporting learners’ perspectives, creating opportunities for choice and encouraging the sense of self-determination.
• As described within Deci and Ryan’s (1985) self-determination theory, to the extent that language learners experience learning context that promote competence, autonomy and, relatedness, they are likely to become autonomously/intrinsically motivated.
• Because teachers’ teaching styles can be flexible, it might be necessary to educate language teachers to understand the importance of satisfying learners’ basic psychological needs and of course satisfying the learners’ psychological needs can be done through providing opportunities for choice and input, empathizing with the learners’ perspective.
• Autonomy-supportive teachers create opportunities for learners to work in their own way and encourage learners’ efforts and persistence.

Therefore, to achieve integration and self-determination, self-determination theory suggests that the three psychological needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness must be satisfied (Deci & Ryan, 2000; Ryan & Deci, 2002). Many empirical and field studies support the claim

that an internalized orientation for language learning is associated with experiencing these three needs. In other words, L2 learners possess more internalized reasons for language learning when they have strong perceptions of autonomy, competence, and relatedness (Noels, 2005). In educational settings, autonomy-supportive teaching style is deeply associated with learners’ feeling that the teacher genuinely respects and values them. Learners who report such relatedness are more likely to exhibit identified and integrated regulation for the tasks involved in learning, whereas those who feel disconnected or rejected by teachers are more likely to move away from internalization.

To put it more simply, the more language teachers are involved in learners’ learning process by providing them with informative and uncritical feedback, the more the learners feel competent and autonomous in language learning process. Based on the paradigm of self determination theory, language learners’ autonomous motivation can be enhanced provided that the teachers provide opportunities for autonomous learning. Although many more experimental studies are still required, the results of this study highlight the applications of autonomy- supportive teaching style, as described in self-determination theory, to developing autonomous motivation among language learners.

 

References

Deci, E. L. (1971). Effects of externally mediated rewards on intrinsic motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 18, 105–115.

Deci, E. L. (1972). Intrinsic motivation, extrinsic reinforcement, and inequity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 22, 113–120.

Deci, E. L. (1975). Intrinsic motivation. New York: Plenum.

Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. New York: Plenum Press.

Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1991). A motivational approach to self: Integration in personality. InR. Dienstbier (Ed.), Nebraska symposium on motivation: Perspectives on motivation (pp. 237-288). Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.

Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1995). Human autonomy: The basis for true self-esteem. In M. H.Kernis (Ed.), Efficacy, agency and self-esteem (pp. 31-48). New York: Plenum.

Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The what and why of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11, 227–268.

Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2002). The paradox of achievement: The harder you push, the worse it gets. In J. Aronson (Ed.), Improving academic achievement: Contributions of social psychology (pp. 59-85). New York: Academic Press.

Deci, E.L., & Ryan, R.M. (2008). Self-determination theory: A macrotheory of human Motivation, development, and health. Canadian Psychology, 49(3), 182-185.

Deci, E. L., Koestner, R., & Ryan, R. M. (1999). A meta-analytic review of experiments  examining the effects of extrinsic rewards on intrinsic motivation. Psychological Bulletin,125, 627-668.

Markland, D. (1999). Self-determination moderates the effects of perceived competence on intrinsic motivation in an exercise setting. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 21, 351–361.

Noels, K. A. (2001). Learning Spanish as a second language: Learners' orientations and perceptions of their teachers' communication style. Language Learning, 51, 107-144.

Reeve, J. (2006). Teachers as facilitators: What autonomy-supportive teachers do and why their students benefit. Elementary School Journal, 106, 225–236.

 

Please check the How to Motivate Your Students course at Pilgrims website.