A Study of Chinese University Students’ English Learning Motivation, Anxiety, Use of English and English Achievement

Abstract

Research has found that contact with a second language (L2), L2 motivation and foreign language anxiety are important variables affecting L2 learning. Nevertheless, not much research has explored the relationships among these variables and their interactive effects on L2 learning outcomes. The present large-scale survey study examined the relationships between English learning motivation, English classroom anxiety and use of English, as well as their predictive effects on Chinese university students’ English achievement. A total of 439 randomly sampled students from two Chinese universities in Beijing answered the background information questionnaire, the 8-item English Classroom Anxiety Scale and the 35-item English Learning Motivation Questionnaire. The major findings were as follows: (a) English learning motivation, English classroom anxiety and use of English were significantly correlated with one another, and (b) English classroom anxiety, use of English and English learning motivation generally significantly predicted the students’ English achievements. These findings confirm the importance of L2 motivation, foreign language anxiety and contact with the L2 for second language learners. Hence, specific suggestions (e.g., reading and listening to more of a second language, creating a supportive and relaxed L2 classroom environment, etc.) are discussed regarding how to enhance L2 learning motivation, reduce foreign language anxiety and increase contact with the L2 in second language learning, so as to ensure sustainable development in second language learning.

1. Introduction

For decades, researchers in education and social psychology have realized the importance of two variables—L2 (second language) learning motivation and foreign language anxiety in L2 learning, e.g., [1,2]. Access and exposure to the L2 is not only crucial to the successful learning of the language but also important for enhancing the motivation to learn the language and mitigating anxiety associated with learning the language [3,4].

Initiated by Gardner’s [1] socio-psychological L2 motivation model, a plethora of studies have been conducted on L2 learning motivation in various L2 contexts, e.g., [1,5,6]. Other theories have also been proposed to explain L2 learning motivation, such as the self-determination theory [7] and the L2 motivational self-system [5]. These studies generally show that motivation facilitates L2 learning, that students study a second language for various reasons and that motivation may interact with differing factors during the process of L2 learning. Nevertheless, most empirical studies have primarily been guided by Gardner’s [1] or Dörnyei’s [5] theories, indicating that more research using other theories is needed to explain L2 learning motivation from different perspectives.

Since the 1970s, foreign language anxiety (FLA) has been much researched, e.g., [2,8,9,10,11,12,13]. These studies largely confirm the situation-specific and dynamic nature of FLA and its negative effect on L2 learning, although positive effects of FLA have also been reported in some studies, e.g., [14], showing that anxiety helps motivate students to work harder. These results, coupled with the finding that FLA interacts with many variables to collaboratively affect L2 learning, further confirm the complex nature of FLA.

Although research shows that L2 learning motivation and foreign language anxiety constantly interact with other variables, e.g., [11,12], studies on their interactive effects on L2 learning specifically are limited and mixed findings have been found regarding their relationship, as reviewed below. In institutions of higher education in China, English is a language compulsorily learned because of its status as an international lingua franca. College students have to take general English language courses in their first and second years and may choose to take elective English courses in their third and fourth years. Since English is generally learned and used as a foreign language in China, students normally have limited access and exposure to it. A review of the current literature shows that contact with an L2 is crucial to its learning, e.g., [3,4,15]. Hence, it is always important to research students’ English learning motivation, foreign language anxiety and contact with English in relation to English learning outcomes in Chinese EFL (English as a foreign language) contexts.

Because of the complex and dynamic nature of L2 learning motivation and FLA, it is necessary to research and explain L2 learning motivation from perspectives other than Gardner’s [1] socio-psychological L2 motivation model and Dörnyei’s [5] L2 motivational self-system. Moreover, as research shows that findings on the relationship between L2 learning motivation and FLA are mixed and studies on their interactive effects on L2 learning are limited, it is worthwhile to continuously examine the two issues in diverse L2 contexts. Coupled with the importance of contact with the second language in L2 learning, the present large-scale survey study aims to investigate the interactions of English learning motivation, English classroom anxiety and use of English as well as their predictive effects on Chinese university students’ English achievement.

This study tries to explain use of English from the social constructivist view, while trying to explain FLA and L2 learning motivation from the perspective of the self-determination theory. By doing so, this study hopes to uncover different and interesting findings, shedding light on further research on the interaction of contact with the second language, L2 learning emotions and motivation in relation to L2 learning in a manner conducive to sustainable development in L2 learning.

2. Literature Review

2.1. Use of the Second Language

According to the social constructivist theory [15], interaction is vital for learning to take place and language is essential during the process. This clearly indicates the importance of use/contact of the second language in L2 learning. Empirical studies in L2 contexts reveal that exposure to and use of the second language are crucial in improving students’ confidence and proficiency in the L2 and reducing FLA, e.g., [6,14]. Studies in Chinese EFL contexts showed that more exposure to and use of English were major reasons for decreases in FLA and increases in self-confidence in learning and using English, which further motivated the participants to study the language [14,16]. These findings are further confirmed by studies in study-abroad contexts, e.g., [3,4,17]. For example, Hernández’s [17] study of 20 study-abroad students found that interaction and motivation were crucial to the development of the students’ speaking proficiency in both at-home and study-abroad contexts. The study also revealed that interaction with the L2 helped reduce FLA, enhance motivation to learn the L2 and boost confidence in using the language. Gong et al.’s [3,4] study-abroad studies found that opportunities to learn and practice Chinese helped boost the learners’ self-confidence in using the language as well as their motivation to continuously study Chinese and develop their communication skills in various ways.

2.2. L2 Learning Motivation

Research on L2 learning motivation was initiated by the socio-educational/socio-psychological L2 motivation model proposed by Gardner [1,18], which defines L2 learning motivation as influenced by attitudes and orientations towards learning an L2. This model also proposes two fundamental types of L2 learning motivation: integrative motivation and instrumental motivation. Integrative motivation is the motive “to learn a second language because of positive feelings toward the community that speaks that language” [1] (pp. 82–83). Instrumental motivation is the motive to study an L2 for more functional or pragmatic reasons such as achieving a promotion or a better job [18]. This model believes that motivation facilitates L2 learning and that integrative motivation plays a more influential role in L2 learning.

This model has inspired much theoretical and empirical research on L2 learning motivation to identify different types of motivation and explain how they are related to human behavior and language learning, e.g., [5,6,7,9,19]. For example, to explain motives for human behavior, Deci and Ryan [7] advanced the self-determination theory of human motivation, development and wellness, which examines the inherent positive human inclination to move towards growth. The theory specifies three core needs which facilitate the said growth: autonomy, competence and relatedness. Competence refers to the need to experience behaviors as effectively enacted; autonomy means the need to experience voluntary behavior; and relatedness represents the need to interact, be connected to and experience caring for others [20]. The theory also differentiates two types of motivation—intrinsic motivation and extrinsic motivation. Founded upon innate needs for competence and self-determination, intrinsic motivation generally concerns motivation to participate in an activity because it is fun and satisfying to do [7]. Extrinsic motivation generally means motivation to engage in an activity for certain instrumental purposes, such as receiving a (higher) salary or avoiding a punishment [7].

Deci and Ryan’s [7] discussion of intrinsic motivation and extrinsic motivation makes it possible to reconstruct many orientations into a systematic framework. Additionally, the self-determination theory helps explain and hypothesize how orientations are connected to learning outcomes. Hence, this theory has spurred more studies on L2 learning motivation, demonstrating that intrinsic and extrinsic goals can predict L2 learning outcomes, e.g., [21,22,23,24]. In one example, Noels et al. [25] recruited 159 French–English bilingual students from English psychology classes at a university, who answered questionnaires on intrinsic motivation, extrinsic motivation, amotivation, antecedents and consequences of self-determination. The findings showed that the participants’ English learning motivation could be assessed validly by the intrinsic and extrinsic subtypes, and that one could differentiate between amotivation and less self-determined and more self-determined forms of motivation. Lucas et al.’s [21] study indicated that the Filipino students were generally intrinsically motivated to study English because of their exposure to it and argued that they were inherently motivated to use English in listening, reading and speaking thanks to the nature of these skills.

Based on the dichotomy of intrinsic motivation and extrinsic motivation, Schmidt et al. [23] (p. 20) claimed that English learning motivation covered nine dimensions: intrinsic goal orientation towards English, personal psychological goals of achievement and affiliation, extrinsic goal orientation towards English, attribution of success and failure, expectation of success, attitudes towards American and British culture, attitudes towards Americans and British speakers of English, and anxiety. To measure Arabic students’ English learning motivation levels, they designed a 50-item motivation questionnaire reflective of these nine dimensions. In this questionnaire, Intrinsic Motivation had five items (e.g., ‘Learning English is a challenge that I enjoy.’), Extrinsic Motivation contained fifteen items, which listed a variety of external reasons for learning English (e.g., ‘English is important to me because it will broaden my view.’), Personal Psychological Needs described four items (e.g., ‘My relationship with the teacher in this class is important to me.’), Expectations and Locus of Control had nine items reflective of expectations of learning English and attributions of failure and success in English learning (e.g., ‘If I don’t do well in this class, it will be because I don’t try hard enough.’), and Attitudes had four items indicating stereotypical attitudes toward British and American people (e.g., ‘Americans are very friendly people.’). Anxiety had six items reflecting general class anxiety, test anxiety, speaking anxiety and fear of the opinions of the teacher and other students (e.g., ‘I am afraid other students will laugh at me when I speak English.’), and Motivational Strength had six items involving efforts to study English (e.g., ‘I often think about how I can learn English better.’). This questionnaire was then subjected to factor analysis, which confirmed the researchers’ presupposition of the nine dimensions.

Phan et al. [22] administered Schmidt et al.’s motivation questionnaire and Oxford’s Strategy Inventory for Language Learning to 152 Vietnamese university students and interviewed 18 of the survey respondents. They discovered that the respondents were primarily extrinsically motivated and used all strategies at a medium or high level. The researchers thus suggested that teachers should try to make L2 learning (more) enjoyable and relevant to students’ interests and passions in order to enhance their intrinsic motivation.

It is important to note that though the self-determination theory discusses the importance of goals and autonomy in L2 learning, both the theory and Schmidt et al.’s motivation questionnaire need more support from empirical research.

2.3. Foreign Language Anxiety

Foreign language anxiety (FLA) is “the worry and negative emotional reaction aroused when learning or using a second language” [26] (p. 27). It is situation-specific, multi-faceted, complex and dynamic [2]. This is because “… The essence of second/foreign language learning is the communication of personally meaningful and conversationally appropriate messages through unfamiliar syntactic, semantic, and phonological systems” [27] (p. 573). As second-language learners have to experience and handle the stress and ambiguities of communicating within the parameters of an unfamiliar culture, many second language learners find L2 learning inherently stressful.

Gardner [1] assumed that situational anxiety affected both formal and informal language learning. He thus incorporated anxiety into the socio-educational/socio-psychological L2 motivation model and designed an eight-item French Classroom Anxiety Scale to gauge French classroom anxiety. MacIntyre and Gardner [28] administered the French Classroom Anxiety Scale and other eight anxiety scales to 94 Canadian first-year college students. They found that FLA negatively affected production. They also discovered that communication apprehension and social evaluation were elements of foreign language classroom anxiety. All these results supported Horwitz et al.’s [2] generalizations concerning foreign language classroom anxiety further discussed below. MacIntyre et al.’s [29] subsequent study of 37 bilingual Anglophones in a Canadian university showed that competence and FLA were significantly interrelated, and that FLA was consistently negatively correlated with measures of L2 achievement across speaking, reading, writing and comprehension tasks. The study indicated that the arousal of FLA possibly caused some students to become more unwilling to speak the L2.

Horwitz et al. [2] situated anxiety in foreign language classrooms, defining foreign language classroom anxiety (FLCA) as “a distinct complex of self-perceptions, beliefs, feelings and behaviors related to classroom learning arising from the uniqueness of the language learning process” [p. 128]. To gauge this anxiety, they designed the 33-item 5-point Likert Foreign Language Classroom Anxiety Scale, which has then been extensively used or adapted in empirical research in varying L2 contexts, e.g., [8,10,12,13,14,16,19,30,31,32]. These studies, together with those using other methods, have revealed that FLA negatively affects students’ L2 learning, especially L2 speaking, largely supporting the findings in MacIntyre and Gardner [28] and MacIntyre et al. [29]. In another example, Liu [13] investigated the correlation between FLCA and English performance via cross-lagged regression analyses in 934 Chinese first-year university EFL students. The study revealed a significant negative correlation between FLCA and the students’ English test performances. In yet another study, Wang et al. [33] administered several questionnaires regarding FLCA, foreign language enjoyment (FLE), foreign language learning boredom (FLLB) and engagement to 907 Chinese university EFL students. They found that the students’ FLCA, FLE and FLLB were significantly correlated with each other and with their engagement and English achievement.

Despite extensive research on FLA, considering that it is situation-specific, dynamic and closely related to L2 learning outcomes [11], more continuous research is required to better understand issues regarding FLA.

2.4. Relationships between Contact with the L2, L2 Learning Motivation, FLA and L2 Achievement

Although it is acknowledged that L2 learning motivation and FLA interact with each other and other variables to affect L2 learning outcomes, not much research is available on the interaction between the two variables in the existing literature. Brown et al. [34] might be the pioneers in exploring the relationship between L2 learning motivation, FLA and other variables in Japanese university EFL students. They found that students at high English proficiency levels tended to be more integratively motivated and experience lower anxiety. In another case, Liu’s [35] study of Taiwanese EFL undergraduates showed that English learning motivation was significantly negatively correlated with FLA. This finding was further supported by subsequent research, e.g., [9,36]. For example, Dong et al. [9] examined the associations between FLCA, foreign language classroom enjoyment, expectancy-value motivation, and their predictive effects on 280 Chinese high school students’ self-rated English proficiency. They found that the students’ FLCA demonstrated a complex relationship with expectancy-value motivation: as the respondents’ FLCA level increased, their cost value increased, but their expectancy beliefs, intrinsic value, utility value and attainment value decreased. They also found that the participants’ expectancy-value motivation and FLCA powerfully predicted their self-rated English proficiency. To explore the associations between English use anxiety, motivation, self-efficacy and use of English, as well as their predictive effects on students’ English achievements, Wu et al. [36] collected data from 223 Chinese university students. They found a significant negative correlation between use of English anxiety (UAE) and English learning orientation. They also found that UAE and intrinsic motivation-knowledge significantly predicted the students’ English achievements.

Concurrently, research in both at-home and study-abroad contexts shows that access and exposure to the L2 helps to enhance learners’ L2 learning motivation, reduce their anxiety in learning/using the language and promote their L2 achievement, e.g., [3,4,13,14,16,17,37]. For example, Liu [37] explored the relationships among Chinese learning motivation, motivation intensity, use of Chinese and self-rated Chinese competence in 162 international students studying in a Chinese university. She found that the measured variables were significantly related to one another and that use of Chinese and motivation intensity strongly predicted the participants’ self-rated Chinese competence. The study suggests that contact with the L2 is critical in increasing students’ L2 competence and motivation.

Evidently, contact with the second language, L2 learning motivation and FLA interact with one another and jointly impact L2 learning outcomes. Nevertheless, investigations of interactions of the three variables in the same contexts are scarce. Research on their interactive effects on L2 learning outcomes is also still limited when considering the broad complexities of L2 learning.

3. Research Questions

As reviewed above, L2 learning motivation and FLA are two important variables affecting L2 learning outcomes. Contact with the second language is not only crucial to the successful learning of the language but also important to enhance motivation and mitigate anxiety associated with learning the language. Though both L2 learning motivation and FLA have been proven to interact with each other as well as with other variables, not much such research can be found in the current literature. Therefore, the present large-scale survey research sought to investigate the interaction of English learning motivation, English classroom anxiety and use of English, as well as their predictive effects on Chinese university students’ English achievement. The following two research questions were formulated:

(1)

How are the students’ English learning motivation, English classroom anxiety and use of English related to one another?

(2)

How do the students’ English learning motivation, English classroom anxiety and use of English predict their English achievement?

4. Research Design

Participants

This study adopted random sampling, which resulted in the participation of 439 (209 male and 230 female) participants from two Chinese universities in Beijing. Both universities are state-owned and recruit students from all parts of the nation, representing most institutes of higher education in Beijing. Of these respondents, 86 were freshmen, 187 sophomores, 104 juniors and 62 seniors. Aged 18 to 26 (mean = 20.42, SD = 0.57), the participants reported that they generally used English for an average of 1.61 h (SD = 0.68) per day and rated themselves as intermediate learners of English, with a mean range of 4.79 to 6.14 on a scale of 1–10 in proficiency in different aspects of English (see

Table 1. Characteristics of the participants (N = 439).

	Variable	Age	HUE	Test Score	SOEP	SSEP	SREP	SLEP	SWEP
Score
Mean		20.62	1.61	71.18	5.71	4.79	6.14	4.97	5.28
SD		0.57	0.68	11.67	2.07	2.17	2.25	2.28	2.23
Skewness		0.804	0.843	−0.653	−0.392	0.059	−0.439	0.101	−0.111

Notes. HUE = hours of using English; SOEP = self-rated overall English proficiency; SSEP = self-rated spoken English proficiency; SREP = self-rated reading English proficiency; SLEP = self-rated listening English proficiency; SWEP = self-rated writing English proficiency.

).

Instruments. Data in this study were collected via questionnaires, which consisted of three parts: the background information questionnaire, the 8-item English Classroom Anxiety Scale and the 35-item English Learning Motivation Questionnaire (see Appendix A).

The Background Information Questionnaire. This questionnaire had five items, including gender, age, year of study, discipline, and hours spent using English per day.

English Classroom Anxiety Scale. Since most Chinese university students mainly learned English in classrooms, this study focused on English classroom anxiety. The eight-item English Classroom Anxiety Scale (ECAS) used in this study was adapted from that in Gardner [1] because it was short and specific to L2 classroom learning. To better fit the present situation, ‘French’ was replaced by ‘English’ from the original items.

The English Learning Motivation Questionnaire. The 35-item English Learning Motivation Questionnaire (ELMQ) was adapted from that developed by Schmidt et al. [23]. To better fit the present situation, items concerning attitudes toward Americans and British people as well as those concerning anxiety and motivational strength were excluded. Additionally, four changes were made to the remaining items: (a) ‘future tense’ was changed to be ‘present tense’; (b) the item ‘I study English because I want to study abroad’ was added to the Extrinsic Motivation Scale, and the item ‘I really want to learn more English than before’ was added to the Personal Psychological Needs Scale, so that they reflected the real situation of Chinese university students; (c) the word ‘Egypt’ was replaced by ‘China’; and (d) the expression ‘want to’ was removed because the learners were taking English class. Consequently, the final questionnaire consisted of 35 items, covering 4 dimensions: Extrinsic Motivation (ELMQ1) had 16 items reflective of external motives to learn English, the 9-item Expectation and Locus of Control (ELMQ2) suggested expectations and attributions of success and failure in English class, the 5-item Personal Psychological Needs (ELMQ3) indicated personal and psychological needs for learning English, and Intrinsic Motivation (ELMQ4) had 5 items indicative of inner motives to learn English.

Both ECAS and ELMQ items were placed on a 5-point Likert scale, with values of 1–5 assigned to the alternatives ranging from ‘strongly disagree’ to ‘strongly agree’, respectively. Thus, the higher the ECAS score, the more anxious a respondent was; the higher the ELMQ1/ELMQ2/ELMQ3/ELMQ4/ELMQ score, the greater motivation a respondent had.

As shown in

Table 2. Characteristics of the instruments (N = 439).

Measure	No. of Items	Reliability	MITC (p = 0.01)	Mean	SD	Skewness	Kurtosis
ECAS	8	0.793	0.507	2.91	0.79	0.218	−0.456
ELMQ1	16	0.762	0.362	3.21	0.52	−0.162	−0.091
ELMQ2	9	0.536	0.240	3.01	0.47	0.024	0.534
ELMQ3	5	0.601	0.356	3.49	0.69	−0.323	−0.289
ELMQ4	5	0.812	0.608	3.09	0.92	−0.122	−0.748
ELMQ	35	0.850	0.347	3.18	0.45	−0.113	−0.187

Notes. ECAS = English Classroom Anxiety Scale; MITC = mean item-total correlation; ELMQ1 = Extrinsic Motivation; ELMQ2 = Expectation/Control; ELMQ3 = Personal Psychological Needs; ELMQ4 = Intrinsic Motivation; ELMQ = The English Learning Motivation Questionnaire.

, the ECAS, the ELMQ and their subscales all achieved high reliability in the present study (r = 0.601~0.850) [38]. Skewness (−0.323~0.218) and kurtosis values (−0.748~0.534) demonstrated that all ECAS and ELMQ data were normally distributed [39]. The scale scores showed that the respondents were generally moderately anxious (mean = 2.91) in English classrooms and moderately motivated to study English (mean = 3.01~3.49).

English achievement. The participants were requested to report their scores in an English test that they had recently taken, and self-rate their overall English proficiency as well as their overall proficiencies in speaking English, reading English, listening English and writing English on a scale of 1 (very poor) to 10 (native-like).

Procedure. This research was approved by the Science and Technology Ethics Committee (Humanities, Social Sciences and Engineering) of the first writer’s institution. All the questionnaire items were translated into Chinese, back-translated and double-checked. Then, the researchers contacted instructors of English courses at the two universities and asked them to distribute the questionnaires to their students. Positive responses were obtained from 11 instructors, who digitally distributed the questionnaires to their students during the 9th and 10th weeks of the 2022 spring semester after they had just taken an English examination such as a mid-term course examination or TOEFL test. All participation was voluntary, and a consent form was signed before the students answered the questionnaires. This resulted in 439 valid questionnaires, which was larger than expected when we set the confidence level at 95% and the margin of error at 5% to sample the population.

Data analysis. The quantitative data were analyzed using SPSS 22. Prior to further analyses, all test scores were standardized on a scale of 1–100. Then, means and standard deviations were calculated in order to examine levels of English learning motivation and English classroom anxiety. Correlation analyses were utilized to investigate the associations between English learning motivation, English classroom anxiety, use of English and English achievement. Finally, multiple regression analyses were conducted to explore the predictive effects of English learning motivation, English classroom anxiety and use of English on the participants’ English achievement.

5. Results

5.1. Statistical Analysis of English Achievement

As reported in

Table 3. Correlations between English achievement measured in different ways (N = 439).

Measure	Mean	SD	Skewness	Kurtosis	2	3	4	5	6
1Test score	71.18	11.67	−0.653	2.986	0.456 **	0.319 **	0.375 **	0.361 **	0.458 **
2SOEP	5.71	2.07	−0.392	−0.263	1	0.740 **	0.791 **	0.715 **	0.742 **
3SSEP	4.79	2.17	0.059	−0.781		1	0.631 **	0.772 **	0.651 **
4SREP	6.14	2.25	−0.439	−0.523			1	0.661 **	0.716 **
5SLEP	4.97	2.28	0.101	−0.747				1	0.629 **
6SWEP	5.28	2.23	−0.111	−0.803					1

Notes. ** = p ≤ 0.01. SOEP = self-rated overall English proficiency; SSEP = self-rated speaking English proficiency; SREP = self-rated reading English proficiency; SLEP = self-rated listening English proficiency; SWEP = self-rated writing English proficiency; coefficient of determination: small = r ≤ 0.1; medium = r = 0.3; large = r ≥ 0.5 [40].

, the skewness (−0.653~0.101) and kurtosis values (−0.803~2.986) indicate that the scores for English achievement measured in each way fell into a normal distribution [39]. Meanwhile, the respondents had a mean score of 71.18 (SD = 11.67) in English tests and a self-rated score of 4.97 to 6.14 (SD = 2.07~2.28) out of 10 in overall English proficiency and proficiencies in specific skills, implying that the participants generally considered themselves intermediate learners of English.

Table 3 indicates that English achievement measured in different ways was significantly related to one another (r = 0.319~0.791, p ≤ 0.001). Of all the coefficients, those between self-rated overall English proficiency (SOEP) and self-rated proficiency in different aspects of English and test scores were the highest (r = 0.715~0.791, p ≤ 0.001). Consequently, self-rated overall English proficiency was used as a valid measure of English achievement in the following analyses of the present research.

5.2. Correlations between Use of English, English Classroom Anxiety, English Learning Motivation and English Achievement

Table 4. Correlations between UE, EA, ECAS and ELMQ scales (N = 439).

Measure	EA	ECAS	ELMQ1	ELMQ2	ELMQ3	ELMQ4	ELMQ
UE	0.354 **	−0.275 **	0.208 **	0.062	0.217 **	0.330 **	0.272 **
EA	1	−0.473 **	0.297 **	0.110 *	0.212 **	0.478 **	0.375 **
ECAS		1	−0.313 **	−0.144 **	−0.320 **	−0.572 **	−0.444 **

Notes. ** = p ≤ 0.01, * = p ≤ 0.05; UE = use of English; EA (SOEP) = English achievement (self-rated overall English proficiency); ECAS = English Classroom Anxiety Scale; ELMQ = English Learning Motivation Questionnaire; ELMQ1 = Extrinsic Motivation; ELMQ2 = Expectation/Locus of Control; ELMQ3 = Personal Psychological Needs; ELMQ4 = Intrinsic Motivation; coefficient of determination: small = r ≤ 0.1; medium = r = 0.3; large = r ≥ 0.5 [40].

shows that use of English, English classroom anxiety, English learning motivation and English achievement were all significantly (p ≤ 0.01) related to each other. ECAS was significantly negatively related to all ELMQ scales (r = −0.144~−0.572, p ≤ 0.003), meaning that the more anxious a respondent was, the lower extrinsic motivation/intrinsic motivation/expectations/personal psychological needs they had. ECAS was also significantly negatively related to use of English and English achievement, indicating that the more anxious a participant was, the lower use of English per day and the lower English achievement they reported. ELMQ scales were all significantly positively correlated with English achievement and use of English except for ELMQ2, suggesting that the greater motivation a participant had, the higher use of English per day and the higher English achievement they had.

5.3. Predictors for Students’ English Achievement

Table 5. Regression analyses results: coefficients and significance of predictors for English achievement (N = 439).

Predictor		ELMQ4	ECAS	Use of English	ELMQ1	ELMQ3
English achievement	β	0.252	−0.263	0.190	0.156	−0.111
	t	4.99 **	−5.42 **	4.53 **	3.02 **	−2.11 *
	p	0.000	0.000	0.000	0.003	0.036
	VIF	1.664	1.537	1.148	1.755	1.797
	Cohen’s f2	0.3	0.4	0.47	0.49	0.5

Notes. ** = p ≤ 0.01; * = p ≤ 0.05; effect size of Cohen’s f²: small = f² ≤ 0.02; medium = f² = 0.15; large = f² ≥ 0.35 [40].

presents the results of step-wise multiple regression analyses, which show that ELMQ4 (intrinsic motivation), ECAS (English classroom anxiety), use of English, ELMQ1 (extrinsic motivation) and ELMQ3 (personal psychological needs) were powerful predictors for the students’ English achievement, accounting for 22.8%, 5.9%, 3.3%, 0.7% and 0.7% of the total variance, respectively. Of the predictors, ECAS (β = −0.263, t = −5.42, f² = 0.4) and ELMQ3 (β = −0.111, t = −2.11, f² = 0.5) were negative, while ELMQ4 (β = 0.252, t = 4.99, f² = 0.3), use of English (β = 0.190, t = 4.53, f² = 0.47) and ELMQ1 (β = 0.156, t = 3.02, f² = 0.49) were positive.

6. Discussion

6.1. Levels of English Learning Motivation, English Classroom Anxiety and Use of English

The present research revealed that the participants reported spending around 1.5 h using English per day, implying that they generally used English for quite a long time every day. This was probably because in addition to course work, the participants generally read and/or listened to English to be informed of the newest developments in different fields, and watched English movies and TV programs, thanks to the wide use of technology. This was also probably because the participants were studying in Beijing, where students normally have more exposure to and chances to use English, as university campuses in China, especially in the capital city of Beijing, have become increasingly multilingual in recent decades because of globalization. This might also partially explain why the participants reported being moderately anxious in English classrooms, as found in similar EFL contexts, e.g., [13,16].

Meanwhile, the participants rated themselves as intermediate English learners and reported being moderately motivated to learn English, as found in similar EFL contexts, e.g., [9,16]. Probably because students generally do not have much exposure to or chances to use English in Chinese EFL contexts, they tend to underestimate their English proficiency. All these factors may directly and indirectly affect their motivation to study the language, as indicated by the correlations between the use of English, motivation and English achievement found in the present study.

6.2. Correlations among English Learning Motivation, English Classroom Anxiety and Use of English

Correlational analyses showed that use of English was significantly related to English learning motivation but negatively related to English classroom anxiety, further supporting the close relationship between contact with the L2 and L2 learning motivation/foreign language anxiety found in the reviewed literature, e.g., [3,4,6,14,17]. As discussed in the social constructivist theory [15], interaction with a language is vital for learning. Through constant interaction with the L2, learners are bound to be motivated to learn it and improve their proficiency. Gradually, they will become less and less anxious during the process of learning and using the language.

This research also revealed a significant negative relationship between English learning motivation and English classroom anxiety, as revealed in other similar studies [9,31,35,36], confirming the interaction of the two variables in L2 learning. For example, a respondent who was more anxious in English class tended to be less extrinsically and intrinsically motivated, have lower expectations/locus of control and fewer personal psychological needs, and vice versa. It seems that a more motivated student might worry more about making mistakes, being negatively evaluated, and/or being outperformed by their peers. Nevertheless, since limited studies have examined foreign language anxiety and L2 learning motivation guided by the self-determination theory, more studies in different L2 contexts are needed to support the findings and interpretations of the present research.

6.3. Relationships between English Learning Motivation, English Classroom Anxiety, Use of English and English Achievement

This research discovered that English classroom anxiety was not only highly negatively related to English achievement, but also negatively predicted the latter, further corroborating the idea that foreign language anxiety is an influential negative factor for L2 learning [2,8,13,16,29]. Alternatively, a participant who was anxious in English class tended to have lower English achievement. Understandably, an anxious student is often less confident in speaking English and tends to be unwilling to be active in English class, while those with little anxiety are confident and active in classroom activities [12,13,14,16,41]. Hence, an active and confident student often learns more in class, while an anxious and reticent student tends to learn less.

The study also revealed that English learning motivation (ELMQ) was significantly positively correlated with English achievement. Moreover, ELMQ4 (intrinsic motivation) and ELMQ1 (extrinsic motivation) was a significantly positive predictor, while ELMQ3 (personal psychological needs) significantly negatively predicted the students’ English achievement. These findings further pinpoint the significance of L2 learning motivation, especially intrinsic and extrinsic motivation in L2 learning [21,22,23]. Unexpectedly, personal psychological needs (ELMQ3) significantly negatively predicted the participants’ English achievement, possibly because ELMQ3 items concerned competition with other students (e.g., ‘It is important to me to do better than the other students in my class.’) and getting along with other students. These concerns might have put them under stress and thus negatively affected their learning of English. ELMQ2 (expectancy/locus of control) did not predict the sample’s English achievement, which was probably because ELMQ2 items were about expectations of English learning and attributions of success and failure in learning English in class. The expectations and attributions might differ from student to student and change as class content was different. It might also be possible that the effects of ELMQ3 and ELMQ2 were offset by ECAS and use of English. For a better understanding, all these findings need to be validated with more empirical evidence.

In addition, this research showed that use of English was significantly positively related to English achievement. Use of English also positively predicted the sample’s English achievement. These findings attest to the importance of contact with the L2 [3,4,17], as it helps improve proficiency in the language, reduce foreign language anxiety and boost confidence in using the language and motivating oneself to study it.

6.4. Limitations of the Study

This study was one of the few that investigated the associations between contact with an L2, L2 learning motivation and FLA as well as their predictive effects on students’ L2 achievement, which revealed many insightful findings. Even so, it had some limitations. First, this research was primarily quantitative; a more comprehensive analysis is necessary to shed more light on (a) identifying nuanced differences in use of English, and (b) understanding English classroom anxiety and English learning motivation. Qualitative data might have helped explore what specific motivations positively or negatively affected students’ learning of English, which will be examined in future research. Moreover, the scales utilized were adapted from those used in the current literature but not further validated in the present research. Future research should include more validity analyses, such as confirmatory factor analysis to examine which items better fit the context. Additionally, a nonparametric method might be better for examining the predictive effects of the measured variables on the participants’ English achievement, and should be used in further research.

7. Conclusions and Implications

This research explored the associations among English learning motivation, English classroom anxiety and use of English and their predictive effects on Chinese university students’ English achievement. This study revealed numerous details. For example, the participants reported spending around 1.5 h using English per day, rated themselves as intermediate learners of English, were generally moderately anxious in English classrooms and were moderately motivated to study English. The study also discovered that use of English was significantly related to English learning motivation but negatively related to English classroom anxiety, and English learning motivation was significantly negatively related to English classroom anxiety. Regarding the effects of these three measured variables, the study found that English classroom anxiety significantly negatively predicted the students’ English achievement, while use of English and English learning motivation significantly positively predicted the latter. However, it should be noted that ELMQ3 significantly negatively predicted the students’ English achievement and ELMQ2 did not predict the latter.

These findings confirm the importance of L2 learning motivation, foreign language anxiety and contact with the second language in L2 learning. Therefore, it is beneficial for both L2 teachers and students to increase students’ contact with the second language, which not only helps enhance students’ motivation to learn the language but also improves their confidence and competence in the language. Various activities can be organized to help increase students’ contact with and use of the second language thanks to the development of technology, such as reading newspapers and books, watching movies and TV episodes, taking online courses or communicating with people online and/or on campuses. Also, thanks to the rapid development of technology, virtual reality (VR) technology has become more commonly used to teach and learn foreign languages within the last two decades [42,43]. VR technology means that computers can create the same environment as the real world via computer image and graphics technology, where “users can enjoy the authentic environment via listening, watching and touching” [42] (p. 302). Hence, VR-based activities and/or programs (e.g., Duolingo VR and Rosetta Stone VR) can provide immersion, interaction and imagination for learners to learn and use the foreign language in addition to increasing their interest, motivation and engagement in the language [42,43,44]. Hsu’s [45] survey study showed that VR’s immersion significantly positively impacted EFL learners’ engagement in VR-based English language learning. It is thus better for students to make good use of VR-based learning activities, programs and apps to practice different skills in the second language and learn its culture.

To reduce foreign language anxiety, teachers are advised to be friendly, supportive and encouraging, and to organize various activities to help reduce students’ anxiety and boost their confidence in using English in class [9,10,12,46,47]. This is because stressful classroom environments might block easy acquisition of the second language. In addition, teachers should better present course content in ways compatible with their students’ English proficiency, needs and goals. With comprehensible input, students may feel more confident and motivated to study the second language. Since a certain degree of anxiety is facilitative towards motivating students to study harder [14], teachers can also make learning (more) challenging by designing learning and tasks slightly above their students’ proficiency in the second language.

It is equally important for teachers to increase students’ motivation to study the second language. Compared with other types of motivation, intrinsic motivation is indeed a greater motive for students to study the second language, as revealed in the present study. Hence, it is important to foster an intrinsic interest in the second language, as suggested in Phan et al. [22], which can be carried out through sharing learning experiences, selecting enjoyable materials, organizing various and fun activities and cultivating a sense of accomplishment in students. It is also important to help students realize the benefits of learning the second language (extrinsic motivation), such as winning scholarships, getting better jobs, traveling or living abroad, passing examinations and so on. This will motivate students to study the second language independently. This is especially necessary when the second language is learned only as a foreign language. Gradually, students can be expected to become used to learning the language of their own will.

As such, students should understand the nature of L2 learning and be active in order to perform well in class. With adequate knowledge about L2 learning and preparation, they may not be (as) worried about ‘making mistakes’, ‘answering questions’, or ‘being laughed at’ and therefore would choose to be active in classroom activities. Thus, they may enjoy the class (more), understand (more) the benefits of learning the L2, and invest (more) effort into learning it. With a greater use of the language, students will naturally become more confident and proficient in the second language, which in return further motivates them to study better. Thus, a beneficial circle forms, which leads to a feeling of happiness and a sense of fulfillment.

By doing all the above, students are bound to become more interested in, more motivated in and more engaged in learning the second language, which will in return lead to sustainable and successful L2 learning.

Guided by the social constructivist theory and the self-determination theory, the present research recruited a large sample of participants and examined the associations between use of English, foreign language anxiety and motivation and their predictive effects on English achievement from a new perspective. The findings helped us better comprehend how these variables interacted with each other and collaboratively affected English achievement, thus enriching the existent literature and contributing to sustainable development in L2 learning. Ever since positive psychology [48] was introduced to second language acquisition, research has been focused on positive emotions (e.g., enjoyment and happiness) and other negative emotions (e.g., boredom and sadness). It will be interesting to examine how these different emotions interact with motivation to affect language learning outcomes.

Finally, many learners have been learning a second language in VR, which is very likely to be the future trend in language learning. As discussed in [49,50], VR has been applied in various areas of higher education teaching, research and training in that it offers a (more) immersive learning experience which helps eliminate external distractions and promote engagement in the learning. This will lead to a better understanding of the subject matter, as evidenced in [49,50]. It shall be the same with second language learning. Yet, little research has been performed to examine the relationships among the use of VR, students’ L2 learning motivation, engagement and achievement [42]. This should be the focus of future research, especially because VR will be an important means of sustainable (language) learning.