Choice Theory and L2 Learners’ Engagement, Satisfaction, and Performance

Subject Areas : Research in English Language Pedagogy

Shahram Ebrahimi Ahmadabad ¹ , Afsar Rouhi ² , Hossein Sadeghoghli ³

1 - Department of English Language Teaching, Sarab Branch, Islamic Azad University, Sarab, Iran
2 - University of Mohaghegh Ardabili
3 - Department of English Language Teaching, Sarab Branch, Islamic Azad University, Sarab, Iran

Received: 2023-03-19 Accepted : 2023-06-03 Published : 2023-06-01

Keywords: choice theory, Psychological needs, satisfaction, performance, Engagement,

Abstract :

The current study sought to explore the effect of instruction primarily informed by choice theory on the engagement, performance, and satisfaction of EFL students in school settings. Central to choice theory is the claim that all human behaviors are rooted in choices primarily driven by internal instincts and five basic psychological needs, namely survival, freedom, power, love belonging, and fun. To conduct the present study, 159 Iranian male students of English were randomly split into an experimental and a control group. The experimental group was exposed to the choice theory skills program, whereas the control group experienced routine classroom activities over a semester. A questionnaire with four dimensions was used to quantify participants' degree of engagement; a battery of tests developed by the school board of examiners was administered to check their academic performance; and a questionnaire with five criteria assessed their satisfaction with the program. The engagement of the two groups was compared through an independent samples t-test, their satisfaction with the program was checked through a second independent samples t-test, and their performance scores were analyzed through one mixed between-within-subjects ANOVA. Indices obtained for engagement, satisfaction, and performance showed that students who received activities in congruence with their internal instincts had significantly better indices of engagement, better academic performance, and higher indices of satisfaction with the experiment. Based on the results obtained choice theory is recommended to be integrated into instructional materials.

References:

Appleton-Knapp, S. L., & Krentler, K. A. (2006). Measuring student expectations and their effects on satisfaction: The importance of managing student expectations. Journal of Marketing Education, 28(3), 254-264.

Ball, S. J. (2016). Neoliberal education? Confronting the slouching beast. Policy Futures in Education,14(8), 1046-1059.

Bhagat, V. (2013). Neuroticism and academic performance of medical students. International Journal of Humanities and Social Science Invention, 3(1), 51-55.

Brown, C. P., Ku, D. H., Barry, D. P., & Puckett, K. (2022). Examining preservice teachers’ conceptions of teaching to consider the impact of policymakers’ neoliberal reforms on their sense-making of their new profession. Journal of Teacher Education, 73(5), 463-478.

Bryson, C., & Hand, L. (2007). The role of engagement in inspiring teaching and learning.   Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 44(4), 349-362.

Burdenski, T. K., & Wubbolding, R. E. (2011). Extending reality therapy with focusing: A humanistic road for the choice theory total behavior car. International Journal of Choice Theory and Reality Therapy, 31(1), 14-30.

Burns, M. K., Vance, D., Szadokierski, I., & Stockwell, C. (2006). Students need survey: A psychometrically sound measure of the five basic needs. International Journal of Reality Therapy, 25(2), 4-8. 

Esteban-Guitart, M., & Moll, L. C. (2014). Lived experience, funds of identity, and education. Culture & Psychology, 20(1), 70-81.

Fredricks, J., Blumenfeld, P., & Paris, A. (2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74(1), 59-109.

Gabriel, E., & Matthews, L. (2011). Choice theory: An effective approach to classroom discipline and management. The Journal of Adventist Education, 2(February/March), 20-23.

Giddens, A. (1991). Modernity and self-identity: Self and society in the late modern age. Polity Press.

Glasser, W. (1998a). The quality school: Managing students without coercion. Harper Collins.

Glasser, W. (1998b). Choice theory: A new psychology of personal freedom. Harper Collins.

Glasser, W. (2000). Reality therapy in action. Harper Collins.

Glasser, W. (2009). Introduction to choice theory: Teaching students responsible behavior. Quality Education Programs, Inc. San Pedro.

Graham, E. E. (1995). The involvement of sense of humor in the development of social relationships. Communication Reports, 8(2), 158-169.

Jang, H., Kim, E. J., & Reeve, J. (2012). Longitudinal test of self-determination theory's motivation mediation model in a naturally occurring classroom context. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104(4), 1175-1188.

Judge, T. A., & Kammeyer-Mueller, J. D. (2008). Affect, satisfaction, and performance. In N. M. Ashkanasy & C. L. Cooper (Eds.), Research companion to emotion in organizations (pp. 136–151). Edward Elgar Publishing.

Lyngstad, M. (2022). At home with the mavericks: Student and teacher perspectives of the transformative potential of Glasser’s choice theory at an alternative secondary school. Journal of Transformative Education, 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1177/15413446221130363

Mason, C. P. (2016). Using reality therapy trained group counselors in comprehensive school counseling programs to decrease the academic achievement gap. International Journal of Choice Theory and Reality Therapy, 35(2), 14-24.

Mason, C. P., & Dye, L. (2017). Attending to basic needs: Implementing reality therapy in school counseling programs to enhance academic achievement and career decision-making skills. International Journal of Choice Theory and Reality Therapy, 37(1), 46-55.

McGee, J. J., & Lin, F.-Y. (2017). Providing a supportive alternative education environment for at-risk students. Preventing School Failure: Alternative Education for Children and Youth, 61(2), 181-187.

Nakamura, S., Phung, L., & Reinders, H. (2021). The effect of learner choice on l2 task engagement. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 43(2), 428-441.

Philp, J., & Duschesne, S. (2016). Exploring engagement in tasks in the language classroom. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 36, 50-72.

Reeve, J. (2012). A self-determination theory perspective on student engagement. In S. L. Christenson, A. L. Reschly, & C. Wylie (Eds.), Handbook research on student engagement (pp. 149-172). Springer Science & Media.

Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68-78.

Sullo, B. (2007). Activating the desire to learn. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Wubbolding, R. E. (2011). Reality therapy. American Psychological Association.

Wubbolding, R. E. (2017). Reality therapy and self-evaluation: The key to client change. American Counseling Association. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119376248

Zhang, Z. (2020). Learner engagement and language learning: A narrative inquiry of a successful learner. The Language Learning Journal, 50(3), 378-392.