Pan-Pacific Association of Applied Linguistics 16(2), 103-123

A Study of English Writing and Domain-Specific Motivation

and Self-Efficacy of Chinese EFL learners
Yanyan Zhang and Hui Guo1
Wuhan University

Zhang, Y. Y. & Guo, H. (2013). A study of English writing and

domain-specific motivation and self-efficacy of Chinese EFL
learners. Journal of Pan-Pacific Association of Applied Linguistics,
16(2), 103-123.
This paper aims to analyze the relationships between English writing
and domain-specific motivation and self-efficacy of Chinese EFL
learners. 66 English major students from two grades were invited as
participants to complete a writing task and two self-designed
questionnaires on English writing motivation and self-efficacy,
respectively. It was found that the students were largely not
self-efficacious with respect to English writing although they had a
relatively high motivation for English writing. The results of correlation
analyses indicated that English writing motivation, self-efficacy and
English writing proficiency positively and significantly correlated with
each other for English major freshmen, but not for sophomores.
Moreover, the two groups of students differed significantly in terms of
English writing proficiency, English writing self-efficacy and intrinsic
motivation. These results are partially consistent with those of the
previous research and have important implications for the teaching of
English writing in EFL countries.
Key Words: English writing, domain-specific, motivation, self-efficacy

1 Introduction
English writing has been a notoriously difficult and long investigated skill in
English learning and teaching for EFL learners. A large amount of research
has been carried out to study this skill from various aspects. Some
researchers focused on the teaching perspective by studying the theories,
principles, and methods of English writing, such as the traditional product
approach, process approach, and more recent genre approach to teaching
English writing in EFL classrooms (e.g., Badger & White, 2000; Flowerdew,
*This study has been supported by National Funds for Social Science (Developing
Chinese Students Generic Competence, Project No.:10BYY088), by Fundamental
Research Funds for the Central Universities (Post-70s Young Scholar Research
Funds at Wuhan University).
1
First/corresponding author: Yanyan Zhang; second author: Hui Guo.

103

C 2013 PAAL 1345-8353/00

Yanyan Zhang and Hui Guo

1993; Gee, 1997; Pincas, 1982; Tardy, 2006). Other researchers investigated
the factors influencing EFL learners English writing proficiency, such as
writing ability in their mother tongue, general proficiency in English, English
speaking competence, the level of English expressive vocabulary, and writing
strategies (e.g., Kobayashi & Rinnert, 1992; Mu & Carrington, 2007; Wang,
2003; Zhang, 2010). One aspect that has not been sufficiently researched is
the relationships between individual factors and English writing.
Among many individual factors, such as age, aptitude, motivation,
attitude, personality, cognitive style, hemisphere specialization, and learning
strategies, motivation catches the eye of researchers because many of these
other variables are dependent on motivation for their effects to be realized
(e.g., Oxford & Shearin, 1994). Motivation is considered by many to be one
of the basic determining factors in success in developing a second or foreign
language and it determines the extent of active, personal involvement in L2
learning (Oxford & Shearin, 1994, p.12). Previous studies have shown that
motivation plays a very important role in the learning of English as a foreign
language. However, the previous research usually examines the relationship
between general motivation and overall English proficiency. More recently,
researchers have recognized that task motivation is more domain-specific and
task-oriented and is thus more crucial for the completion of specific tasks,
such as writing tasks (e.g., Drnyei, 2003; Eccles, 2005). Despite the
importance of task motivation, little empirical research has been undertaken
in this area. In addition, there have been few studies to explore the
relationship between English writing motivation and English writing
proficiency, especially in the context of China.
Self-efficacy, revealing ones beliefs and evaluation of ones own
competence, is another essential individual factor that influences academic
achievement. Previous studies have suggested that self-efficacy is positively
and significantly correlated with foreign language proficiency (e.g., Bandura,
1986, 1997; Linnebrick & Pintrich, 2003; Liu, 2008). However, like
motivation studies, the previous research on self-efficacy often focused on
the relationship between general self-efficacy and overall English proficiency.
Domain-specific self-efficacy, like task motivation, is a less researched
subject. Moreover, the previous researchers seldom treated motivation and
self-efficacy as two different variables due to their close relations (e.g.,
Zimmerman, 2000).
In the context of China, where English is learned as a foreign
language, researchers pay more attention to non-English major students, and
seldom investigate English major students individual factors and English
writing ability. To address the above lack, this paper aims to investigate the
relationships between English writing motivation, English writing
self-efficacy, and English writing proficiency of English major students in
China. As English writing is a compulsory course in the curriculum of
English major students, and an important component in English learning for

104

A Study of English Writing and Domain-Specific Motivation

and Self-Efficacy of Chinese EFL learners

non-English major students, this study hopes to shed some light on the
teaching of English writing in China and other EFL countries.
2 Literature Review
There have been a great number of studies on learning motivation and
self-efficacy with respect to their definitions, classifications, relationships
with foreign language learning, etc. (on motivation: e.g., Brown, 2002;
Drnyei, 1998; Gardner, 1985; Ryan & Deci, 2000; on self-efficacy: Bandura,
1986, 1995, 1997; Linnebrick & Pintrich, 2003; Salomon, 1984). In the
following, this paper will review previous research and outline the research
gaps, on the basis of which research questions of the present study will be
proposed.
2.1 Research on motivation
Gardner (1985) defines L2 motivation as the extent to which the individual
works or strives to learn the language because of a desire to do so and the
satisfaction experienced in this activity (p.10). Gardners definition
overemphasizes the social aspects while omitting the educational dimensions
(Drnyei, 1998). Drnyei (1998) holds that motivation is a process whereby
a certain amount of instigation force arises, initiates action, and persists as
long as no other force comes into play to weaken it and thereby terminate
action, or until the planned outcome has been reached (p.118). Investigation
into the English learning motivation may not be applicable to the study of
English writing motivation. A learner with a strong desire to learn English
well does not always have a great intention to perform well on the written
mode of language, like writing (Brown, 2002). Based on Drnyeis definition,
this study defines English writing motivation as including the following three
aspects, namely, the reasons students decide to learn English writing, the time
they can sustain and the effort they pay to English writing.
Gardner (1985) classifies motivation into two types: integrative
motivation and instrumental motivation. Integrative motivation shows
learners positive attitudes toward the target language group and strong desire
to integrate into that group, or at least an interest in meeting and interacting
with people from that group. A key aspect of integrative motivation is a
psychological and emotional identification, which could be with the speakers
of the L2, the cultural and intellectual values associated with the L2 and with
the actual language itself. Different from integrative motivation, instrumental
motivation pertains to the potential pragmatic aims of target language
proficiency, such as getting a better job or a higher salary. Learners with
instrumental motivation want to gain some social or economic rewards
through language achievement, which is a more functional reason for
language learning.

105

Yanyan Zhang and Hui Guo

Gardner (1985) proposes that integrative motivation is superior to

instrumental motivation, and integratively motivated students are more
successful learners than instrumentally motivated students. In Gardners
research, he found a high correlation between integrative motivation and L2
learning achievement and concluded that integrative motivation is an
important requirement for successful language learning. However, Strong
(2006) examined the relationship between integrative motivation and
acquired second language proficiency among a group of Spanish-speaking
kindergartners in the American classroom and found no positive association
between integrative motivation and acquired English proficiency. Gardners
research was mainly carried out in second language settings. China, being a
typical EFL context, provides few, if there are any, authentic settings for
students integration into the English speaking communities. Previous
researchers have suggested that Chinese EFL learners often display
instrumental purposes for learning English, such as getting a higher grade in
TOFEL, winning scholarships, and finding a better job in the future (Zhang,
2006).
Ryan & Deci (2000) proposed another motivational construct, intrinsic
and extrinsic motivation. Intrinsic motivation refers to the doing of an
activity for its inherent satisfactions rather than for some separable
consequence (Ryna & Deci, 2000, p.56). It is a motivation to engage in an
activity for its own sake (Pintrinch & Schunk, 2002). People are motivated to
finish a task because of the joy of doing a particular activity or satisfying
ones curiosity. Extrinsic motivation pertains whenever an activity is done in
order to attain some separable outcome (Ryan & Deci, 2000, p.60). Typical
extrinsic rewards could be grades, prizes, money, and even certain types of
positive feedback, and behaviors initiated solely to avoid punishment (Brown,
2002).
The previous studies suggest that intrinsic motivation is a better
promoter of peoples behavior than extrinsic motivation, especially in the
long run. According to Ryan & Deci (2000), intrinsic motivation is found to
correlate more closely with language learning success than extrinsic
motivation because it results in high-quality learning and creativity. Extrinsic
motivation could also have some effect on promoting learning, but it has its
own weaknesses. Brown (2002) pointed out that the immediate prize or
praise could increase individuals desire to learn, but the withdrawal of them
could also be devastating. The dependency on these tangible rewards will
damage the desire to learn.
This study adopts Ryan & Deci (2000)s classification, i.e.
intrinsic/extrinsic motivation, for the following reasons. First, it is a more
inclusive classification than the integrative/instrumental dichotomy, which
relies largely on environments. The learning situation in China can hardly
provide an authentic environment for integrative motivation. Second, the
present research focuses on a particular task, English writing, so the

106

A Study of English Writing and Domain-Specific Motivation

and Self-Efficacy of Chinese EFL learners

definition of intrinsic/extrinsic motivation is in line with the idea of

domain-specific motivation. Third, it has been found that self-efficacy is
closely related to intrinsic motivation (Zimmerman2000), so adopting the
intrinsic/extrinsic distinction could allow us to compare with previous
research findings.
2.2 Research on self-efficacy
According to Bandura (1986, 1995, 1997), self-efficacy is a belief in ones
capabilities to organize and execute courses of action required to attain
designated types of performances. Bandura pointed out that a higher sense of
self-efficacy promotes human accomplishment and personal well-being in
many ways. People who are confident about their capabilities will make
efforts to complete challenging tasks rather than avoid them. Even when
serious frustration occurred, they would attribute their failures to insufficient
efforts or deficient knowledge and tend to make greater efforts to overcome
the difficulties. In the face of unfavorable circumstances during learning,
these self-efficacious learners believe they can deal with it and will approach
challenges with the intention and anticipation of mastery, intensifying their
efforts and persistence accordingly. Therefore, with this efficacious outlook,
personal accomplishments are achieved and stress is reduced. On the other
hand, if people doubt their capabilities, they will be threatened by the
frustrating tasks and will not be confident about themselves on the set goals.
They would attribute their failures to their aptitude, to the task itself, and to
all the adverse outcomes, and become depressed and would not pay enough
efforts. Consequently, they would give up and do not perform well.
Previous research has shown that self-efficacy beliefs could influence
peoples efforts and performance. Salomon (1984) found that the higher ones
self-efficacy is, the greater self-rated mental effort and achievement the
student will have. Self-efficacy beliefs could also increase students
persistence and influence their skill acquisition, both directly and indirectly.
In terms of emotion, self-efficacious students would have less stress, anxiety,
and depression than those who have a lower self-efficacy. Bandura (1997)
evidenced that students with a higher self-efficacy tend to participate in the
activity more readily, work much harder and persist longer. When these
students face difficulties and setbacks, they tend to have fewer negative
emotional reactions and less doubt about their own capabilities than those
who are not confident enough. In the choice of activities, self-efficacious
students perform much more readily in difficult and challenging tasks than
inefficacious students. Linnebrick & Pintrich (2003) hold that students who
do not have enough confidence in themselves are less likely to exert effort
and are more likely to give up quickly. On the other hand, students will ask
for help if they think they are able and efficacious and they will not be
threatened by asking for help. Moreover, students with a high self-efficacy

107

Yanyan Zhang and Hui Guo

are likely to use more cognitive strategies than those who have lower
self-efficacy beliefs. Liu (2008) found that Chinese non-English major
students self-efficacy level is positively correlated with their English
proficiency.
2.3 Research gaps
The previous studies demonstrate that both motivation and self-efficacy may
influence peoples behaviors and their academic achievement. However, the
previous research usually focused on general motivation or self-efficacy, and
seldom examined domain-specific motivation and self-efficacy, such as
English writing motivation and English writing self-efficacy and their
relationships with English writing proficiency. Moreover, previous
researchers often considered self-efficacy as a motivational variable
(Zimmerman, 2000), and seldom treated motivation and self-efficacy as two
different individual factors. Furthermore, compared with non-English major
students, English major students are not often involved as participants in the
research on the relationship between English writing and individual factors.
In addition, researchers and teachers have noted that in many situations, the
learners are simply not motivated for writing, and they are not confident in
their English writing ability, especially in the Chinese context (e.g., Zhang,
2006). Given these considerations, this study aims to investigate the
relationships between English writing motivation, English writing
self-efficacy, and English writing proficiency of English major students in
China. There are two specific research questions as follows:
1. What are the statuses of Chinese EFL learners motivation and self-efficacy
for English writing?
2. What are the relationships between Chinese EFL learners domain-specific
motivation, self-efficacy and their English writing proficiency?
3 Research Method
3.1 Participants
Two groups of English major students from a key university in China were
invited to participate in the study. Group one consists of 43 freshmen and
group two 23 sophomores. In both groups, there are more female students
than male students, which reflects a common phenomenon among language
major students. When this study was undertaken, the first group of students
were in their second semester in university, and the second group were in the
fourth semester and were about to attend the TEM4 2 (Test for English
2

This is a high-stake national test for evaluating the English proficiency of English

108

A Study of English Writing and Domain-Specific Motivation

and Self-Efficacy of Chinese EFL learners

Majors, Band 4). It is assumed that the English proficiency level is largely
guaranteed to increase from group one to group two.
3.2 Instruments
Three instruments were adopted in this study, including an English writing
task and two questionnaires of domain-specific motivation and self-efficacy
targeting at English writing, respectively.
(1) Writing task
The writing task of this study is a TOEFL independent writing, which is the
second task in the Writing section of TOEFL IBT. This task requires the test
taker to write an essay within 30 minutes in response to a given question. The
writing task employed in the present study is in the following:
Some people like to do only what they already do well. Other
people prefer to try new things and take risks. Which do you
prefer? Use specific reasons and examples to support your
choice.
The participants were required to write at least 300 English words,
because an essay of TOEFL Independent Test usually needs to be longer than
300 words to gain a nice grade. But we relaxed the time limit, and all the
participants finished their writing within 45 minutes.
(2) English writing motivation questionnaire
Based on the questionnaires used in previous research (Motivation for
English Writing Questionnaire (Zhang, 2006), and Motivation for English
Learning Questionnaire (Gao, Zhao, Cheng and Zhou, 2003), the authors
designed a questionnaire to test Chinese EFL learners motivation for English
writing. The questionnaire consists of two parts and is written in Chinese to
ensure the participants full understanding of the questions3. The first part
aims to gather the participants personal information, such as gender, age,
grade and hometown, and the second part aims to investigate the participants
English writing motivation.
Fifteen English major freshmen were invited to attend a pilot study of
the questionnaire and some changes were made on the basis of the results.
The finalized English writing motivation questionnaire consists of 22 items in
total, 7 of which (items 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 16, 19) are items of intrinsic motivation,
whereas the other 15 are items of extrinsic motivation (see Appendix A for
major students in Mainland China.
3
The motivation and self-efficacy questionnaires in Appendices A and B are
translated versions from the original questionnaires.

109

Yanyan Zhang and Hui Guo

details). Each item is accompanied with five options ranging from one to five
for students to choose (1---strongly disagree, 2---slightly disagree, 3---not
sure, 4---slightly agree, 5---strongly agree). The Cronbachs alpha values for
the entire questionnaire, intrinsic items and extrinsic items are .760, .707
and .749, respectively, indicating fairly good internal consistency of the
questionnaire.
(3) English writing self-efficacy questionnaire
The English Writing Self-efficacy Questionnaire employed in this study was
adapted from Pajares, Hartley andValiante (2001)s self-efficacy scales.
There are 16 items to investigate the students self-evaluation of their
capacities in English writing from different perspectives. The first two items
(items 1 and 2) aim to examine the participants holistic self-beliefs on
English writing, the following two items (items 3 and 4) aim to investigate
the students attitudes and reactions when they are faced with setbacks in
English writing, and the remaining 12 items focus on the learners self beliefs
in different and specific areas concerning English writing (see Appendix B
for details). Each item has five choices ranging from one to five,
corresponding to strongly disagree to strongly agree. The questionnaire
has also undergone a pilot study and the finalized version has a Cronbachs
alpha of .838, indicating a high reliability.
3.3 Data collection and analyses procedures
All the data were collected in class with the help of their respective teachers
of the two groups of participants. The participants were asked to complete the
writing task first and then fill up the two questionnaires. They were asked to
give their immediate and direct responses to the questions as honestly as
possible. It was emphasized that there were no predetermined expectations
and the best answer would be their true idea. The writing process lasted for
about 45 minutes, and filling up questionnaires 15 minutes, so the whole
investigation took about 1 hour to finish. When the writing and
questionnaires were all collected, we checked each of them to make sure that
there were no missing responses.
There are altogether 43 essays and 86 questionnaires from English
major freshmen and 23 essays and 46 questionnaires from English major
sophomores. The two researchers graded all the English essays independently
according to the same rating criteria of the TOFEL Independent Writing. As
the TOFEL test adopts a 5-point scoring scale, the scores given are allowed to
have a decimal fraction, such as 4.25, in order to differentiate the writing
grades between our students. According to the TOFEL criteria, an essay with
a full score of five should effectively address the topic and task, be well
organized and well developed, display unity, progression and coherence and
display consistent facility in the use of English. The final grade of an essay is

110

A Study of English Writing and Domain-Specific Motivation

and Self-Efficacy of Chinese EFL learners

the average grade of the two researchers scores. The difference of the two
raters scores should be within a half point (i.e., 0.5). If it is beyond a half
point, a third rater would read the essay and then the final grade will be the
average of the most close two scores. Finally, in order to be consistent with
the traditional grades of examination, every grade was changed from the
5-point scale to the 100-point scale. For example, a score of 4.25 is converted
to 85.
As for the questionnaires, we adopted the following criteria for
judging the average level of English writing motivation and English writing
self-efficacy, as shown in Table 1.
Table 1. Grading Criteria of Questionnaire Items
Motivation / Self-Efficacy

Mean
4.5-5.0
3.5-4.4
2.5-3.4
1.5-2.4
1.0-1.4

High
Medium
Low

Options
Strongly agree
Agree
Uncertain
Disagree
Strongly disagree

The data were then analyzed by using SPSS in the following

steps:
(1) Descriptive statistics of the participants English writing,
motivation and self-efficacy for English writing;
(2) Independent samples t-test between the two groups of
participants;
(3) Pearson correlation analyses of motivation for English
writing, English writing self-efficacy and participants
English writing scores.
4 Results
4.1 Results of descriptive statistics
The results of the two groups of participants English writing,
domain-specific motivation and self-efficacy are summarized in Table 2 and
Table 3, respectively.
Table 2. Descriptive Statistics of Group One
N

Min

Max

Mean

SD

English Writing

43

40.00

90.00

68.37

14.28

Self-Efficacy

43

2.44

3.88

3.29

.39

Motivation

43

3.14

4.41

3.79

.32

Intrinsic

43

2.71

4.71

3.78

.50

111

Yanyan Zhang and Hui Guo

Extrinsic

43

3.00

4.40

3.79

.36

Table 2 shows that the English major freshmen have a passing grade
(Mean=68.37) on average in the writing task. Their self-efficacy in English
writing is at the medium level (Mean=3.29), and their motivation for English
writing is relatively high (Mean=3.79).
Table 3. Descriptive Statistics of Group Two
N

Min

Max

Mean

SD

English Writing

23

50.00

93.00

75.87

11.87

Self-Efficacy

23

2.63

4.50

3.51

.41

Motivation

23

3.00

4.36

3.69

.35

intrinsic

23

2.29

4.29

3.53

.39

extrinsic

23

2.93

4.93

3.76

.49

Table 3 indicates that the English major sophomores achieve a fairly

good grade (Mean=75.87) on average in the writing task. Their English
writing self-efficacy (Mean=3.51) and motivation (Mean=3.69) are both
relatively high. Compared with the freshmen, the sophomores did better in
the writing task, and seemed to be more confident in their capabilities in
English writing, although they appeared to be less motivated, especially
intrinsically.
4.2 Results of independent samples t-test
The independent samples t-test was carried out in order to examine if there
are significant differences between the two groups of participants in terms of
English writing, domain-specific motivation and self-efficacy. The results are
presented in Table 4.
Table 4. Results of Independent Samples t-test
Mean Difference

df

Sig. (2-tailed)

English Writing

-7.497

-2.149

64

.035

Self-Efficacy

-.21930

-2.165

64

.034

Motivation

.10116

1.176

64

.244

intrinsic

.24989

2.076

64

.042

extrinsic

.03170

.301

64

.764

Table 4 demonstrates that group two significantly excels group one in

English writing (p=.035<.05) and self-efficacy (p=.034<.05). There is also a
significant difference in intrinsic motivation (p=.042<.05) between the two

112

A Study of English Writing and Domain-Specific Motivation

and Self-Efficacy of Chinese EFL learners

groups, showing that English major freshmen have a significantly higher

intrinsic motivation than sophomores. However, there is no significant
difference in the overall motivation or extrinsic motivation between the two
groups (p>.05).
4.3 Results of correlation analyses
The results of correlation analyses between English writing, domain-specific
motivation and self-efficacy of the two groups of participants are presented in
Tables 5 and 6, respectively.
Table 5. Correlation Analyses of Group One

English Writing

English Writing

Self-Efficacy

Motivation

intrinsic

extrinsic

.430(**)

.347(*)

.191

.334(*)

.561(**)

.625(**)

.334(*)

.680(**)

.879(**)

.248

Self-Efficacy
Motivation
intrinsic
extrinsic

** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

* Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).

From table 5, we see that for the English major freshmen, their
English writing is positively and significantly correlated with English writing
self-efficacy (r=.430, p<.01) and motivation (r=.347, p<.05). Moreover, their
self-efficacy is highly and significantly correlated with their motivation
(r=.561, p<.01), both intrinsically (r=.625, p<.01) and extrinsically (r=.334,
p<.05). Of the two types of motivation, extrinsic motivation is more highly
correlated with the overall motivation (r=.879, p<.01) than intrinsic
motivation does (r=.680, p<.01).
Table 6. Correlation Analyses of Group Two

English Writing
Self-efficacy
Motivation
intrinsic
extrinsic

English Writing

Self Efficacy

Motivation

intrinsic

extrinsic

-.017

.108

.166

.051

.393

.556(**)

.206

.318

.935(**)

-.039
1

Table 6 demonstrates that for the English major sophomores, English

writing is neither correlated with self-efficacy nor with motivation. However,

113

Yanyan Zhang and Hui Guo

the participants English writing self-efficacy is positively and significantly

correlated with intrinsic motivation (r=.556, p<.01), but not with extrinsic
motivation. Moreover, extrinsic motivation is highly correlated with the
overall motivation (r=.935, p<.01).
5 Discussion
5.1 Chinese English major students motivation and self-efficacy for
English writing
The present study found that the English major freshmen have a relatively
high overall motivation for English writing, and their intrinsic motivation and
extrinsic motivation are on the same level. The English major sophomores
also have a relatively high overall motivation, but they are more extrinsically
motivated than intrinsically motivated. The t-test results show that there is no
significant difference in the overall motivation or extrinsic motivation
between the two groups. However, there is a significant difference in the
intrinsic motivation between the two groups, suggesting that the English
major freshmen have a significantly higher intrinsic motivation than the
sophomores. These results indicate that the freshmen like English writing
more than the sophomores, and their preference is out of their internal
interest in English writing itself. The sophomores weaker intrinsic
motivation may be attributed to the pressure of the forthcoming English Test
for English Majors, Band 4 (TEM 4). When this study was being carried out,
the sophomore group was preparing for the TEM 4 and had to have frequent
practice of English writing, which might have affected their intrinsic
motivation and the overall English writing motivation. The results of the
present study are partially consistent with the previous research. Zhang (2006)
found that Chinese college students are only moderately motivated for
English writing (Mean = 3.05), far lower than the English writing motivation
of our participants. Zhangs participants are non-English major students
whereas our participants are English majors. Usually, students choosing to
major in English have a higher English learning motivation and general
English proficiency, which may explain the discrepancies between Zhang
(2006)s study and the present study.
This study also found that the English major freshmen are not
confident in their English writing as the average value of their self-efficacy is
only 3.29. The sophomore group has a higher self-efficacy value (Mean =
3.51), suggesting that they are more confident in their capabilities in English
writing than the freshmen. Moreover, the t-test results show that group two
has a significantly higher self-efficacy in English writing than group one,
further suggesting that the sophomores have a more positive belief in their
English writing proficiency and their capacities to deal with difficulties in
English writing. The sophomores have made considerable progress in English

114

A Study of English Writing and Domain-Specific Motivation

and Self-Efficacy of Chinese EFL learners

writing, which may have strengthened their confidence and increased their
self-efficacy in English writing.
5.2 Relationships between motivation and English writing
For the English major freshmen, English writing proficiency is positively and
significantly correlated with the overall English writing motivation (r=.347,
p<.05). More specifically, English writing proficiency has a positive and
significant correlation with extrinsic motivation (r=.334, p<.05), but not with
intrinsic motivation. Furthermore, extrinsic motivation is more highly
correlated with the overall motivation (r=.879, p<.01) than intrinsic
motivation does (r=.680, p<.01). These results are different from Deci &
Ryan (1985), which claims of a higher correlation between intrinsic
motivation and language proficiency than between extrinsic motivation and
language proficiency. One reason for explaining the discrepancy may be that
this study focuses on the relationships between task motivation (i.e., English
writing motivation) and English writing proficiency, but Deci & Ryans study
investigated the relationships between general motivation and English
proficiency. Another reason is that English is learned as a foreign language in
China, so extrinsic motivation may play a more important role for Chinese
EFL learners, such as to achieve a higher grade, to gain recognition by
teachers and parents, and to find a good job in the future.
For the English major sophomores, English writing proficiency is not
significantly correlated with English writing motivation. This result comes as
a surprise, as motivation has always been found to be positively correlated
with English proficiency in previous research (e.g. Gardner, 1985). Probably
at this stage, the sophomores have made much improvement in English
writing, so they are not strongly motivated to practise English writing or to
make further improvements. In addition, the pressure of the coming test
(TEM4) and preparation for the test may have affected the sophomores
motivation for English writing. As a result, compared with the freshmen
group, the sophomore groups English writing proficiency has improved, but
their English writing motivation decreased, particularly their intrinsic
motivation, leading to the disappearance of the correlation between English
writing proficiency and English writing motivation. This finding needs our
attention. The decrease of English major students intrinsic motivation
demonstrates that the students are no longer enthusiastic about English
writing, and they are now more often driven by external forces to practice
English writing. Given that the effects of extrinsic motivation cannot last
long (Brown, 2002), English teachers need to enhance students intrinsic
motivation for English writing so as to improve their English writing
proficiency in the long run. The basis for maintaining intrinsic motivation
and becoming more self-determined is to satisfy the students basic
psychological needs, namely, their feeling of competence, autonomy and

115

Yanyan Zhang and Hui Guo

relatedness (Deci & Ryan, 1985).

5.3 Relationships between self-efficacy and English writing
It is found that the freshmens English writing self-efficacy is positively and
significantly correlated with their English writing proficiency (r=.430, p<.01).
Moreover, compared with the freshmen, the sophomores have made
significant progress in English writing and their self-efficacy have also
increased significantly. These results indicate that English writing
self-efficacy is closely related with English writing proficiency. The present
study is consistent with Bandura (1995)s findings. Bandura holds that people
with a higher self-efficacy are more successful in their academic achievement.
However, the correlation found between self-efficacy and English writing in
this study cannot show which factor is the cause and which is the effect. Most
probably, the two factors may mutually influence each other. Students who
are confident in their English writing capacities will practise English writing
more actively in order to make greater progress, and the improvement in
English writing proficiency will further strengthen their sense of self-efficacy
and in return foster their English writing.
This study found that the sophomores English writing self-efficacy is
not correlated with English writing proficiency. This may be because the
sophomores have undergone nearly two years of professional training and
their English writing proficiency is already quite high. They are generally
quite confident in their English writing abilities and have little individual
variations in this regard. Therefore, self-efficacy is not correlated with
English writing proficiency. This result also indicates that English writing
self-efficacy may play a more important role for students with a lower
English writing proficiency. Further research is needed to validate this
finding. In order to enhance students self-efficacy, teachers can help build up
their self-confidence by praising them, encouraging them, relieving the
pressure of examinations and reducing their sense of failures.
5.4 Relationships between self-efficacy and motivation
The freshmens English writing self-efficacy is highly and significantly
correlated with their English writing motivation (r=.561, p<.01), and the
correlation with intrinsic motivation (r=.625, p<.01) is higher than with
extrinsic motivation (r=.334, p<.05). The sophomores English writing
self-efficacy is also positively and significantly correlated with intrinsic
motivation (r=.556, p<.01), but not with extrinsic motivation. These results
demonstrate that English writing self-efficacy is closely related to English
writing motivation, especially with intrinsic motivation, consistent with
previous research. Zimmerman (2000) claims that self-efficacy is correlated
with intrinsic motivation. Zimmerman even treats self-efficacy as a

116

A Study of English Writing and Domain-Specific Motivation

and Self-Efficacy of Chinese EFL learners

motivational variable, influencing the choice of activities, level of effort,

persistence and emotional reactions. Therefore, we could foster students
intrinsic motivation by strengthening their self-efficacy so as to arouse their
enthusiasm in learning English writing.
6 Conclusion
Motivation and self-efficacy are two important individual factors that may
influence students foreign language learning. This study investigated the
relationships between domain-specific motivation and self-efficacy, and
English writing proficiency by taking as participants two groups of English
major students in China. The following are the major findings of the present
study.
(1) The English major students in China have a relatively high
English writing motivation, but their English writing self-efficacy
is not strong.
(2) Chinese English major students English writing self-efficacy
positively and significantly correlates with their intrinsic
motivation for English writing.
(3) Chinese English major freshmens English writing
proficiency positively and significantly correlates with both their
English writing motivation and English writing self-efficacy.
(4) There is no correlation between English writing proficiency
and English writing motivation or English writing self-efficacy
for English major sophomores in China, which is most probably
influenced by the pressure from a forthcoming English
examination.
This study has important pedagogic implications. Firstly, the study
can help students to increase their motivation and self-efficacy for English
writing. It is necessary for students to realize that they should try to sustain
their interest in English writing and become more self-efficacious in English
writing. If they are conscious of their motivation and self-beliefs, they will
take a more positive attitude toward the future learning of English writing,
sustain their interest in it, become more confident, attribute the failures to less
effort and increase their achievement finally.
Secondly, this study may help English teachers to understand the
current situation of students learning of English writing, choose various
teaching methods to enhance students motivation for English writing,
promote their English writing self-efficacy and to increase their English
writing achievement. For example, English teachers can improve their
teaching methods, brisk the class atmosphere and make English writing
interesting to students. They could also design some challengeable tasks

117

Yanyan Zhang and Hui Guo

within students capabilities to let students feel successful, which could both
raise their interest in English writing and their self-beliefs in the ability to
write well in English.
Thirdly, the study suggests that considering the two individual
variables together, namely, motivation and self-efficacy, is more effective in
promoting students English writing than just considering one of them. These
two variables are positively and significantly correlated with each other. If
both of them are improved, students may perform much better in their
English writing.

References
Badger, R., & White, G. (2000). A process genre approach to teaching writing.
ELT Journal, 54(2), 153-160.
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social
cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Bandura, A. (1995). Self-Efficacy in changing societies. New York:
Cambridge University Press.
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-Efficacy: The exercise of control. New York:
Freeman.
Brown, H. D. (2002). Principles of language learning and teaching (3rd ed.).
Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
Deci, E. L., Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic Motivation and
Self-Determination in Human Behavior. New York: Plenum Press.
Drnyei, Z. (1998). Motivation in second and foreign language learning.
Language Learning, 31(3), 117-135.
Drnyei, Z. (2003). Attitudes, orientation, and motivations in language
learning: Advances in theory, research, and applications. Language
Learning, 53 (sup.), 3-32.
Eccles, J. S. (2005). Studying the development of learning and task
motivation. Learning and Instruction, 15, 161-171.
Flowerdew, J. (1993). An educational or process approach to the teaching of
professional genres. ELT Journal, 47(4), 305-316.
Gao, Y. H., Zhao, Y., Cheng, Y., & Zhou, Y. (2003). Motivation types of
Chinese college undergraduates. Modern Foreign Languages, 26(1),
28-38.
Gardner, R. C. (1985). Social psychology and second language learning: The
role of attitudes and motivation. London: Edward Arnold Press.
Gee, S. (1997). Teaching writing: a genre-based approach. Review of English
Language Teaching, 62, 24-40.
Kobayashi, H., & Rinnert, C. (1992). Effects of first language on second
language writing: Translation versus direct composition. Language
Learning, 42, 183-209.

118

A Study of English Writing and Domain-Specific Motivation

and Self-Efficacy of Chinese EFL learners

Linnenbrink, E. A., & Pintrich, P. (2003). The role of self efficacy beliefs in
student engagement and learning in the classroom. Reading and
Writing Quarterly, 19, 119-137.
Liu, F. G. (2008). The influence of self-efficacy on SLA proficiency of
college freshmen: An empirical study. Journal of Beijing
International Studies University, (12), 64-70.
Mu, C. J., & Carrington, S. B. (2007). An investigation of three Chinese
students' English writing strategies. Teaching English as a Second
or Foreign Language - EJ, 11(1), 1-23.
Oxford, R., Shearin, J. (1994). Language learning motivation: Expanding
the theoretical framework. The Modern Language Journal, 78(1),
12-28.
Pajares, F., Hartley, J., Valiante, G. (2001). Response format in writing
self-efficacy assessment: Greater discrimination increases
prediction. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and
Development, 33, 214-221.
Pincas, A. (1982). Teaching English writing. London: Macmillan.
Pintrich, P. R., Schunk, D. H. (2002). Motivation in education: Theory,
research, and applications (2nd ed.). 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.
Salomon, G. (1984). Television is easy and print is tough: The
differential investment of mental effort in learning as a function of
perceptions and attributions. Journal of Educational Psychology,
76, 647-658.
Strong, M. (2006). Integrative motivation: Cause of result of successful
second language acquisition? Language Learning, 34(3), 1-13.
Tardy, C. M. (2006). Researching first and second language genre learning:
A comparative review and a look ahead. Journal of Second
Language Writing, 15, 79-101.
Wang, L. (2003). Switching to first language among writers with differing
second-language proficiency. Journal of Second Language Writing,
12, 347-375.
Zhang, J. (2006). Dimensions of college students motivation for English
writing and their relations to English writing strategy. Unpublished
masters thesis, Shanxi Normal University, Xian, Shanxi, P.R.
China.
Zhang, Y. Y. (2010). Investigating the role of metacognitive knowledge in
English writing. HKBU Papers in Applied Language Studies, 14,
25-46.
Zimmerman, B. J. (2000). Self-efficacy: An essential motive to learn.
Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 82-91.

119

Yanyan Zhang and Hui Guo

Yanyan Zhang
English Department,
College of Foreign Languages and Literature,
Wuhan University, Luojia Hill,
Wuhan, Hubei Province
430072, P.R.CHINA
Tel: 852 027 68752934
Email: lucyzhangyy@163.com
Hui Guo
Jurongwest St 61,
Blk 652A, #06-378,
Singapore 640652
Tel: 65 83041729
Email: mirandaguo0709@gmail.com

Received: July 5, 2012

Revised: November 22, 2012
Accepted: December 10, 2012

120

A Study of English Writing and Domain-Specific Motivation

and Self-Efficacy of Chinese EFL learners

Appendix
A. Motivation for English Writing Questionnaire
Dear students,
Thank you for your participation in our investigation! This questionnaire is
designed to help us understand your English writing so as to provide
guidance to our teaching of English writing. Please respond to the items in
the questionnaire honestly based on your own learning experience. There is
no good or bad answer for each item. The results of the investigation will be
exclusively used in research. All the responses will be kept confidential.
Thank you very much for your cooperation!
I. Personal Information
(1) Major
(2) Grade
(3) Class
(4) Gender:
(5) Age:
(6) Native PlaceA. Metropolis B. Small and medium towns C. Rural area
II. Motivation for English Writing Questionnaire
The following are some statements that you may agree or disagree. Each item
has five choices ranging from strongly agree to strongly disagree denoted
by number one to five as:
1
2
3
4
5
strongly disagree disagree not sure
agree
strongly agree
Please tick  on the corresponding number.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.

I am very interested in English writing.

I had lot of fun from English writing.
I like writing the topics that I am
interested in.
I will write more if the topic is fun,
Time goes very fast when I am writing
the topic that I am interested in.
I hope that I can get a high score in the
English writing exam.
I practise English writing for better
academic achievement in writing.
I practise English writing because it is
required by different exams, like the
college entrance examination and TEM

1
1

2
2

3
3

4
4

5
5

121

Yanyan Zhang and Hui Guo

9.

10.
11.

12.
13.

14.
15.
16.
17.
18.

19.
20.
21.
22.

4.
Good English writing ability could
improve my communication with
foreign experts and students from
related areas.
I hope that I can write academic articles
in English.
I practise English writing because my
future job has a high requirement on
English writing proficiency.
Good English writing skill might be
helpful for my job-hunting in the future.
I practise English writing in order to
pass tests needed for going abroad, such
as TOEFL.
I practise English writing so as to study
or work abroad in the future.
I practise English writing to improve
my English comprehensively.
Studying English well could build up
my confidence.
I hope that my English composition can
be praised by the teacher.
I hope that my English writing
proficiency can be recognized by my
parents.
I like the writing exercise part in the
textbook.
I practise English writing because
teachers ask me to do so.
I hope that my English composition can
be recognized by my classmates.
I practice English writing to improve
my English writing proficiency.

B. English Writing Self-Efficacy Questionnaire

English Writing Self-Efficacy:
1.
2.
3.

122

I believe that I can learn English writing

well.
I think that my English writing is very
good.
I can overcome the difficulties in

A Study of English Writing and Domain-Specific Motivation

and Self-Efficacy of Chinese EFL learners

4.

English writing.
Low English writing proficiency only
makes me work harder on English
writing.

1
1

2
2

3
3

4
4

5
5

When I write in English:

5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.

16.

I can spell all the words correctly in a

one-page story or composition.
I can punctuate correctly in a one-page
story or composition.
I can use all parts of speech correctly.
I can use English grammar correctly.
I can use English singulars and plurals
correctly.
I can use the tenses of the verbs
correctly.
I can use prefix and suffix of the words
correctly.
I can write a paragraph with clear topic
sentence or main idea.
I can organize sentences to support the
idea of topic sentence.
I can provide a reasonable ending to a
paragraph.
I can write a properly structured and
well-organized
composition
with
introduction, body and conclusion.
I can clearly express my ideas and
wont digress from the main topic.

123