ISSN 0798 1015

Vol. 41 (Number 04) Year 2020. Page 17

Demotivating Factors in Learning English as a Foreign Language: Case in Colombian vulnerable rural schools

Factores desmotivadores en el aprendizaje de inglés como lengua extranjera: caso en colegios rurales vulnerables colombianos

ABAUNZA, Geovanny A. 1; MARTÍNEZ-ABAD, Fernando 2; RODRÍGUEZ-CONDE, María J. 3 & AVALOS-OBREGÓN, María D. 4

Received: 07/10/2019 • Approved: 30/01/2020 • Published: 13/02/2020

Contents

1. Introduction

2. Review of literature

3. Methodology

4. Results and discussion

5. Conclusions

Acknowledgments

Bibliographic references

1. Introduction

Results of investigations in the last two decades, have shown a growing interest on motivation as a critical component of success in the learning process for acquisition of a foreign language and / or second language (L2) (Dörnyei, & Otto 1998; Dörnyei, 2001a; Dörnyei, 2001b; Dörnyei, Z. & Schmidt, 2001; Dörnyei & Clément, 2001; Dörnyei & Ushioda, 2011; Gardner, 1985, 2007; Juriševič & Pižorn, 2013). Dörnyei (1998) points out that motivation fosters the impulse to start learning, followed by a force of support to support the long or short process that this instruction can contemplate and that this, in turn, can condition the other factors involved in the acquisition of L2. On the other hand, the decrease in motivation in L2 is a frequent problem with a more significant presence in the current secondary education systems (Ahmed; 2013; Bastidas & Muñoz, 2011). Findings in studies on demotivation by Dörnyei (1998); Gorham & Christophel (1992) & Hasegawa (2004) reveal that there are external and internal factors that can negatively influence learning. Bekleyen (2011) mentions that when there is a decrease in the level of motivation, demotivation can also occur; which is defined by Dörnyei (2001a: 143) as "specific external forces that reduce or diminish the motivational basis of a behavioral intention or an ongoing action"; those external forces studies have been proven in research mostly with the style and teaching of inappropriate teacher, curriculum, materials and learning environment (Dörnyei & Ushioda, 2011; Kim, 2009; Sakai & Kikuchi, 2009); and as internal forces denote lack of trust in itself and negative attitudes towards L2 (Falout, Elwood & Hood, 2009; Lee & Lee, 2011). Nevertheless, demotivation should not be confused with motivation; the latter is defined in investigations from Ryan & Deci (2000: 61) as “the state of lacking an intention and tact. When motivated, a person's behavior lacks intentionality and a sense of personal causation". Therefore, we can intuit that a motivated individual does not intend to establish and direct behaviors to achieve achievement. On the other hand, Boo, Dörnyei & Ryan (2015), mention that without sufficient motivation, they can be negatively affected future objectives and curricula of students and even of individuals who show excellent academic performance in L2.

This study includes secondary school students in vulnerable rural Colombian populations who have reported poor performance in English as a foreign language (EFL) scores in recent years compared to the regional and general results of the country (Institute Colombian for the Promotion of Higher Education - ICFES, 2018). Additionally, the EF English Proficiency Index (EF EPI, 2018) mentions that Colombian students have shown in the last five years a poor performance in their level of proficiency for the acquisition of English as L2 with an EPI EF = 48.90 compared to 88 countries worldwide and in Latin America, an EPI EF = 11 concerning 17. This current problem and the lack of research on these demotivating factors in L2 is what prompted us to explore the research questions shown below. The answers to these questions can serve as scientific reference for further research and possible improvements and restructuring proposals of the current curriculum that would benefit the foreign language teaching-learning process.

1.1. Objective and Research Questions

This study’s objective is broken down into three research questions, intended to provide evidence of the existence of demotivating factors and their negative impact on the learning process secondary education in vulnerable rural schools in Colombia:

 RQ1. What demotivating factors have been considered in studies conducted in learning of English as a foreign language in secondary education contexts?

RQ2. What demotivating factors do high school students experience in English classes as a foreign language in vulnerable rural schools in Colombia?

RQ3. Are there any relationships between academic performance in the English subject and the demotivating factors expressed by students? How do these factors influence the student's academic performance?

In this section we consider a review of the literature to show possible demotivating factors that negatively affect the motivation of high school students (Elementary school, Junior High school, and High school in EFL contexts), through research conducted in different nations.

2.1. State of the art in Europe and North-America

To answer the first question of this work, we start from studies led by Chamber (1993) who worked in four British schools with Junior High School (JHS) students aged thirteen (n=191) and enrolled in eight classes and seven teachers of L2. The results of the questionnaire made by teachers showed that the demotivation of students could be associated with lack of effort, self-confidence and interest, poor concentration and refusal to class cooperation. They also perceived that these causes of demotivation could be related to psychological, attitudinal, social, historical, geographic factors. On the other hand, half of the students responded that their demotivation was due to the fact that their teachers criticized them, they did not provide clear explanations and the teaching materials used were outdated; another percentage considered the L2 as a waste of time and another group smaller expressed that their classroom was too small for an extensive group. In other context, Oxford (1998) through analysis techniques contained in essays written by high school (HS) American students (n=250) and University students (US) about their past experiences in L2 learning, reported having demotivating experiences manly generated by the teacher's role. Similarly, Dörnyei (1998) in Dörnyei & Ushioda (2011) indicated the possible factors that generate demotivation in Learning English and German as L2 in HS students from Hungary (n=50) through structured individual interviews and content analysis. The results of these analyses identified that there were nine factors that negatively influenced the motivation of the HS students, for example, 40% of individuals emphasized teacher´s competence and style.

Gkonou (2012) analyzed work diaries of Greek students (n=8) belonging to EFL courses. Although the qualitative study focused on determining what factors cause anxiety to increase in EFL students, he noted that the factors associated with the pedagogy underlying the teaching of skills, and more specifically the teaching of listening and writing are those that negatively affected motivation in the L2 class.

2.2. State of the art in Asia

Hasegawa (2004) established a quantitative study in which a questionnaire with six dichotomous items (false-true) and open responses to Japanese JHS students (n=125) and HS students (n=98). The results indicated a demotivating factor with “strong impact” associated with inappropriate teacher behavior. Keblawi (2005) presents a mixed study with JHS students (n=137) and students of HS Israelites (n=157). From it, Bryman studies (2001) developed a semi-structured interview with twenty-five students and ten teachers of L2; for the other students (n=269) he applied a questionnaire and evidenced by part of the students that the teacher, the learning group and the textbooks are factors that have a negative and considerable influence on their motivation. The overall result of the research denoted five factors. Hamada & Kito (2008) in a mixed study of students Japanese (n=100) of second-year HS, applied a questionnaire with 35 items from Kikuchi & Sakai (2007) studies and structured interviews with (n=26) students in the initial sample. The results showed the presence of five demotivating factors, where the low intrinsic motivation was the most relevant demotivating factor. Similarly, Hamada (2008) conducted a mixed study simultaneously on students (n=44) of HS and JHS (n=36) to whom it was administered a questionnaire with 26 items based on research by Kikuchi & Sakai (in press) and Hamada & Kito (2008) showing that grammar and self-confidence for JHS students were the most demotivating factors; and for HS students, too much Information in textbooks contributed to its demotivation. In the same context, Sakai & Kikuchi (2009) in a quantitative study applied a questionnaire with 35 items to students (n=562) of HS and JHS students of language schools in four Japanese institutions where there was determined through a factor analysis that there were five demotivating factors in which the learning content materials, and test results were the most incident in the students. On the other hand, Kim (2009a) in a quantitative study of Korean students of JHS and HS (n=407) using a questionnaire with 31 items and a factor analysis, extracted five demotivating factors where the difficulty of learning English, dissatisfaction with English classes and grading system were the most substantial demotivating factors in both groups. Also, Kim (2009b) through a self-assessment questionnaire with 31 items, in his Factor analysis identified five demotivating factors in Korean students (n=220) from 7 to 9 degree of JHS. The most representative factors in this study focused on the difficulty in learning English, loss of motivation and interest, and characteristics of the class. In a different context, Ghenghesh (2010) advanced a mixed study with HS students (n=144) of four different nationalities (Europe, Asia, Arabia and Africa) from 6 to 10 grade and five L2 teachers to whom he applied a questionnaire with 101 items through a semi-structured interview for both cases. The results through an analysis of variance concluded that the decrease in motivation in the acquisition of L2 might be influenced by age, the context of learning and the role of the teacher. Lee & Lee (2011) developed a mixed study with students (n=170) from 5 and 6 grade HS Koreans, to whom they applied a questionnaire with 57 items based on demotivation constructs and a semi-structured interview (n=7). From an analysis of variance, they obtained that the loss of motivation and interest, difficulty in English learning and class characteristics were the most relevant demotivating factors. In addition, he discovered that male students tended to have a more negative attitude towards L2 and that their low levels of competence towards L2 were as harmful as the factors associated with those already mentioned above, and additionally the negative attitudes towards L2, the attitude of group members, scores and ranking of the tests. Kim (2011) developed a comparative quantitative study where he implemented a questionnaire with 12 items with a closed response from Lamb studies (2007) in High school students and 10 L2 teachers in public and private institutions in Korea (n=6301) of 3 to 6th grade of Elementary schools (ES) and HS. He concluded that the motivation of the student's decreases considerably as they advance to another higher degree, and to experience gained in previous private institutes, it also mentions that the students who attended private centers were harmed in their integrative and extrinsic motivation. In the same study area and with students (n=6301), Kim & Seo (2012) developed a mixed study through interviews and questionnaires derived from the studies of Lamb (2007), Gardner's (1985, 2010) and Ryan & Deci's (2000). They raised open questions to seventeen teachers of L2, which attributed three demotivating factors described by HS students as the negative impact of the teacher, an excessive social expectation of English proficiency, and the full range of English competence gap between students. In the same context, Kim (2012) in a quantitative study established a structural model with a Likert questionnaire with 28 items treated in research by Lamb (2007) in Korean students (n=385) of HS. The constructs showed six demotivating factors, where the difficulty in learning English and the dissatisfaction with the English classes and their classification system were the axes of the demotivation of students. Meshkat & Hassani (2012) established their research in four Iranian schools with HS students (n=421), using a 21-item questionnaire, based on the research of Sakai & Kikuchi (2009). The results allowed to identify six demotivating factors where the lack of school facilities, excessive focus on grammar, and expectation when using English grammar correctly were the most significant sources of demotivation. Alavinia & Sehat (2012), in a quantitative study through analysis of variance, detected three demotivating factors in students (n=165) of Iranian HS through questionnaires with 50 items based on research by Sakai & Kikuchi (2009), Warrington (2005) and  Muhonen (2004), where learning environment, experience of failure and lack of success in English class were the most relevant demotivation factors. Similarly, Hosseini & Jafari (2014) in a quantitative study following the methodology of Sakai & Kikuchi (2009) applied a questionnaire with 35 items to students of Iranian HS (n=604). The results pointed to three demotivating factors where the didactic material and inappropriate content were the main demotivating factors.  Kim & Kim (2016) through a systematic literature review focused the most distinctive demotivating factors in the different Korean education systems (Elementary School - ES; Junior High school–JHS; High school-HS and University-U). In the ES, the factors were: Reduced motivation and interest, teaching methods focusing on words and grammar, Social expectations for high English proficiency. In the same sense, in the HS, they highlighted: Difficulty of English learning features and Lack of motivation or interest. For JHS, the factors were: Difficulty of English learning and Lack of motivation and interest. And for U, Lack of confidence, Lack of meaningful purpose, Lack of improvement and experiences of success, and Lack of self-determination. In the context of China, Li & Zhou (2017) applied a questionnaire to JS students (n=128) through an exploratory factor analysis. The factors extracted in this study were: Teaching Contents and Teaching Process, Teacher-related Factors, Classroom Learning Environment and Facilities, Deficient English Learning Abilities, Lack of Intrinsic Interest, Undesired Influences of Important Others, Textbooks and Teaching Materials, and Lack of Effective Learning Strategies.

2.3. State of the art in Latin America

In the Latin American context, Bastidas (2002) mentions that demotivation can be linked to the lack of practice and communication in English which is the reason for the students of High school why not see the need of using the foreign language outside their environment; also their community and social context only use their first language to communicate with each other. Bastidas & Muñoz (2011) established a diagnostic study with a mixed approach and questionnaires based on the work of Richards & Rodgers (1986) to eighteen urban public schools of education (ES and HS) and thirty-four Colombian teachers. The results mention that the decrease in motivation in HS students is critical and could be associated with the fact that the teachers are not well versed either in methodology or in the command of the English language, there was no English syllabus, and didactic materials were nonexistent.  Pinzón (2011), developed a mixed study with Colombian students of HS of 10 and 11 grade (n=40) through a questionnaire with ten items and a semi-structured interview. The results showed that the methodology of teaching implemented by the teacher and the fear of being ridiculed by other classmates were the two most common demotivating factors.

According to the previous literature review on studies that consider the different demotivating factors that may be present in the learning and acquisition of L2 expressed by students in EFL contexts, some associated harmful components can reduce the motivation in learning L2: the role and competence of the teacher, the learning environment, low intrinsic motivation, didactic material with inadequate content, inferior instructional materials, excessive focus on grammar, difficulty in Learning English, among others. In figure 1, these demotivating factors are shown in their chronological order. In any case, the evidence of studies on this field in secondary education in vulnerable rural populations is unknown, which provides a clear justification for the present study. 

Figure 1
Timeline of the demotivating factors present
in high school students in EFL contexts

Pprepared by authors based on review results (Alavinia & Sehat, 2012; Bastidas, 2002;
Bastidas & Muñoz, 2011; Chamber, 1993; Dörnyei, 1998; Ghenghesh, 2010;
Gkonou, 2013;  Oxford, 1998; Hasegawa, 2004; Hamada & Kito, 2008; Hosseini & Jafari, 2014;
Keblawi, 2005; Kim, 2009a-2009b;  Kim, 2011; Kim & Seo, 2012; Kim, 2012; Kim & Kim, 2016;
Lee & Lee, 2011; Li & Zhou, 2017; Meshkat & Hassani, 2012; Pinzón, 2011;
Sakai & Kikuchi, 2009).                                         

3.1. Design and Variables

The research design considers a non-experimental methodology of descriptive and correlational type. The object of study is not modified seeking to explore and study the variables and identify their possible relationships. The study variables were classified into two categories: explanatory variables within which the possible factors are considered demotivating, and the criteria variables, which include returns in the course of English of the three participating groups.

3.2. Sample and Participants

Sampling was not established as probabilistic for convenience. Specifically, a group which meets similar criteria in geographic location, demography, socioeconomic, and academic from the research region was chosen. The participants are 124 students from a rural school in a vulnerable context from the Colombian region. This particular area has high rates of violence, socioeconomic marginalization, criminality, and forced displacement by armed conflict, drug trafficking, and accessibility problems (Patiño, 2018). The sample is distributed in three Secondary education degrees (JHS) with different levels of learning in English as a language foreign (A2.2 = Basic 2 and B1.1 = Pre-intermediate 1) following the guidelines of the Common Framework European Reference for Languages according to the Colombian Ministry of Education. The first group corresponds to the sixth grade (n=52) between ages 11 to 14, with English level (A2.2), where 40.4% are women (n=21) and 59.6% are men (n= 31); the second group comprises Seventh grade (n= 29) with ages from 12 to 15, with English level (B1.1), it has 51.7% of men (n=15) and 48.3% women (n=14); and the third group corresponds to the eighth grade (n= 43), with ages from 13 to 15 years, with English level (B1.1), and its students are represented by 51.2% women (n=22) and 48.8% men (n=21).

3.3. Measures and Data Collection

The questionnaire applied is an adaptation based on previous theoretical and empirical research. Established by Dörnyei & Ushioda (2011), Kim (2009a) and Sakai & Kikuchi (2009), in which we consider 31 items based on 7 demotivation constructs present in learning and Acquisition of an L2: (a) characteristics of English Classes (Items 1-4), (b) experiences of failure or difficulty of English learning (Items 5-9), (c) course book (Items 10-13), inadequate learning environment (Items 14-16), (d) testing concerns (Items 17-20), lack of interest (Items 21-23), and teacher (Items 24-31). The items included Likert response scales (1 = disagreement and 4 = agree) and underwent a process of translation, adaptation, and validation by experts of education sciences and languages of Latin America in order to converge in an appropriate vocabulary for the understanding of students, followed by a pilot test with 60 sixth grade students from the same location to detect possible ambiguities and avoid biases in research. These items were preceded by the phrase "for me the demotivation in learning English is due to the following reason." The definitive application of the questionnaire was applied with an average duration of 15 minutes.

3.4. Data Analysis

According to the nature of the study we consider two moments to conduct this research: First, an exploratory analysis of the variables was established followed by a descriptive study to know the distribution (frequencies and means). In addition, a calculation of multiple linear regression models was performed to proceed with the study of correlation matrices applying the most appropriate statistics depending on the nature of the variables. In second instance, factor extraction was established from an exploratory factor analysis through primary axis extraction method with oblique rotation (direct oblimim). The reliability of the instrument was estimated as its internal consistency from the calculation of Cronbach's alpha. These procedures were applied based on the answers obtained in the 31 items of the questionnaire, using the statistical package SPSS Statistics 20 (Licensed by University of Salamanca, Campus).

4.1. Exploratory Factor Analysis

According to the reliability analysis applied to the 31 items of the questionnaire, a Cronbach's alpha value of (.920) evidencing high reliability due to its approximation of the value of 1, confirming the existence of a high internal consistency of the instrument (Welch & Eat, 1988). On the other hand, it was necessary to check if the covariance matrix obtained in this research was apt to apply a factor analysis.

This was checked with the Kaiser index- Meyer-Olkin (KMO) of Kaiser (1970) which suggests satisfactory values (≥.80). For this study, the value of KMO was (.902). Likewise, Bartlett's sphericity test (Chi-square = 1034.403, with df 210 and p <.0001) makes sure that the data obtained from the sample have an adequate distribution to carry out this analysis. Then, for the extraction of the demotivating factors were considered: direct oblimim rotation due to its ease in interpretation and presentation of structures (Finch, 2006), the downward trend cut of the magnitude eigenvalues with the Cattell sedimentation graph (Cattell, 1966), and the saturations above ≥ (.40) (Williams, Brown & Onsman, 2010).

For the case of according to the configuration matrix, four demotivation factors were obtained (see table 1), and the total variance extracted by the model was 45.08%. On the other hand, thirteen were excluded items (1, 3, 4, 11, 12, 16, 18, 26, 24, 25, 26, 28 and 29) for not meeting the statistical criteria of inclusion mentioned in this section. For example, item 12 presented simultaneous saturations (.344, -.144, .345 and .174) in the four factors obtained, with loads less than (.40). According to the results obtained and shown in table 1, the second question is then answered by the investigation.

Table 1
Demotivating Factors in Learning English

Source: Authors

The first demotivating factor collects 16.11% of the extracted variance and is made up of nine items. Factor loads focus on three fractions: in a first place, in the student's difficulties in learning English (items 5-9) which understand in memorizing words phrases forced to memorize music and in understanding the lessons. Second, items (17 and 19) related to concern and frustration for their exams and thirdly, item 10, which mentions in outdated textbooks.

According to the value of the item charges, this factor was established as Difficulty of English Learning. The second demotivating factor contains 11.13% of the total variance extracted and is made up of four items. In this case, the factorial charges focused mostly on the items (27, 30 and 31), which refer to the teacher, where the student points out that in their classes he scolds them, they are delicate, and they do not keep up with their understanding. The load is borne by item 2, evidence that their classes focus on translation. According to these results, we can name this factor as Teachers' Competence and Teaching Styles.

The third demotivating factor included 11.07% of the total variance extracted and remained composed of three items, which refer to the inappropriate learning environment. Specifically, the students mentioned the non-use of computers, internet, and audiovisual equipment in the English class (items 14 and 15) and tedious agenda (item 13). Regarding nature and burden factorial on the items, this factor was labeled Inadequate Learning Environment. Finally, with 6.76% of the total variance extracted, the fourth demotivating factor is obtained, which was confirmed by items 21 and 22. These ones refer to the loss of interest and objective to learn English. According to its characteristics, this factor was called Reduced Interest and Motivation. In summary, considering the exploratory factor analysis, the possible demotivating factors present in EFL students in rural vulnerable Colombian contexts are: (F1) Difficulty of English Learning; (F2) Teachers' Competence and Teaching Styles; (F3) Inadequate Learning Environment and (F4) Reduced Interest and Motivation.

4.2. Correlational analysis

To answer the third research question, this section shows the relationship between the variables related to the academic performance of the students in the subject of English and variables related to demotivating factors. Table 2 shows the matrix of corresponding correlations, which include the factors previously extracted.

Table 2
Correlations in Demotivating Factors in Learning English

Source: Authors

Pearson's correlations reached medium or medium-high values in all cases (> .40) and were highly significant (p. <.001), especially in the relationship between academic performance and demotivating factors. Therefore, there is a relationship of moderate and even high intensity between these variables. In all cases, the relationship between the demotivating factors F1, F2, F3 and F4 and academic performance (AP) results conversely, indicating that the higher the presence of demotivation, the lower the academic performance of the students. Specifically, the demotivating factor that reaches a more intense relationship with the AP is the (F2) Teachers' Competence and Teaching Styles, closely followed by the factor (F1) Difficulty in English Learning.

4.3. Regression Analyses

According to the correlation results between Academic Performance (AP) and the Demotivating Factors in Learning English, it is interesting to analyze which demotivating factors influence the most in the yields of the individuals of study. Applying the regression method, with the dependent variables Academic Performance (AP) and independent Demotivating Factors in Learning English, it is obtained that: the linear regression model proposed is highly significant (F = 23,725; p. <.001), with an R 2 = .425, explaining 42.5% of the variability PA total based on explanatory variables. The model is obtained as follows:  AP = 5.707 - .341 * F2-.367 * F1 * -. 186 * F4-.45 * F3. The factor that makes the greatest contribution to the model is the F2 Teachers' Competence and Teaching Styles (p. =. 003) followed by the F1 Difficulty factor in English Learning (p = .006) and F4 Reduce Interest and Motivation (p. =. 003). On the other hand, it turns out that the F3 Inadequate Learning Environment does not reach a significant effect on the model (p. = .597). This situation can be explained due to the significant correlations between the factors having applied an oblique rotation since this factor is the one that relates less intensely with AP. It seems that the rest of the factors absorb a good part of the F3 variance in the model multivariate. According to this, it can be deduced that despite the fact that the F3 factor intervenes significantly in the explanation of performance (as observed in the correlational study), the rest of the factors absorb most of their variance in the multivariate model. This factor, therefore, obtains significant interactions with the rest of the demotivating factors. It is applied a new regression method to obtain a model without having the F3 factor. Giving then as the new value of R2 = .428, F = 31.730 and p≤ 0.000, indicating which is significant and that 42.8% of the total variation in academic performance can be explained by the factors F2, F1, and F4. According to the results, it was proposed as a plausible model: AP = 5.696 – .379 * F1-0.362 * F2-0.1.91 * F4, evidencing then, that the performance of the EFL students in vulnerable rural Colombian schools may be influenced for the factors: F1 (Difficulty in English Learning), F4 (Reduce Interest and Motivation) and F2 (Teachers' Competence and Teaching Styles).

According to the results obtained in this study, it can be mentioned that it was a research with a positive horizon because the research questions were answered with a scientific basis. For example, the review of the status of art allowed recognizing which are the demotivating factors with more impact on the students of English as a foreign language in their academic training since the last 20 years in the global context. These factors converged mostly in: teacher role and competence, learning environment, low intrinsic motivation, didactic material with content inadequate, poor instructional materials, excessive focus on grammar, difficulty in learning English (Chamber, 1993; Oxford, 1998; Dörnyei, 1998; Hasegawa, 2004; Keblawi, 2005; Hamada & Kito, 2008; Hamada, 2008; Sakai & Kikuchi, 2009; Kim, 2009a-2009b; Ghenghesh, 2010; Lee & Lee, 2011; Kim, 2011; Kim & Seo, 2012; Kim, 2012; Meshkat & Hassani, 2012; Alavinia & Sehat, 2012; Dörnyei & Ushioda, 2013; Hosseini & Jafari, 2014; Kim & Kim, 2016; Li & Zhou, 2017).

 Following the order of ideas, the results answered the second question of investigation. According to the exploratory factor analysis applied, the demotivating factors more present in students in EFL from vulnerable rural Colombian contexts were: The difficulty of English Learning, this factor was concluded in research by (Keblawi, 2005; Kim, 2009a, 2009b, 2012; Kim & Kim, 2016; Lee & Lee, 2011; Li & Zhous, 2017); Teachers' Competence and Teaching Styles , this demotivating factor is the most considered by almost all the investigations reported in this study (Chamber, 1993; Oxford, 1998; Dörnyei, 1998; Hasewa, 2004; Keblawi, 2005; Hamada & Kito, 2008; Sakai & Kikuchi, 2009; Kim, 2009a-2009b; Ghenghesh, 2010; Lee & Lee, 2011; Finch, 2011; Kim & Seo, 2012; Kim, 2012; Meshkat & Hassani, 2012; Alavinia & Sehat, 2012; Kim & Kim 2016; Li & Zhou, 2017); Inadequate Learning Environment , this factor was mentioned in the results presented by (Chamber, 1993; Oxford, 1998; Dörnyei, 1998; Hamada & Kito, 2008; Sakai & Kikuchi, 2009; Kim, 2009a; Lee & Lee, 2011; Kim, 2011; Kim, 2012; Meshkat & Hassani, 2012; Kim & Kim, 2016; Li & Zhou, 2017), and Reduced Interest and Motivation , this factor is exposed in investigations by (Dörnyei 1998; Sakai & Kikuchi, 2009; Kim, 2009a, 2009b; Hamada & Kito, 2008; Lee & Lee, 2011; Kim, 2012; Meshkat & Hassani, 2012; Hosseini & Jafari, 2014; Kim & Kim, 2016; Li & Zhou, 2017). Regarding the third research question, the existence of a relationship is evidenced in moderate and even higher intensity among these variables of studies: academic performance and the demotivating factors, indicating that the higher the presence of demotivation, the lower the student academic performance. In other words, to the extent that students present favorable motivational attitudes towards language learning, the academic performance tends to be higher (Dörnyei, 1994; Brown, 2000, Medina, 2006; Woolfolk, Hoy, Hughes, & Walkup, 2007). And finally, applying the regression method in the dependent  variables Academic Performance (AP) and independent Demotivating Factors in Learning English: F1 (Difficulty of English Learning), F4 (Reduce Interest and Motivation) and F2 (Teachers' Competence and Teaching Styles), it is evident that factors F1, F2 and F4 may influence the student performance of EFL in vulnerable rural Colombian schools.

On the other hand, the identification of these demotivating factors opens a framework of reflections that the teacher must contemplate in his teaching-learning process of English as a foreign language. Another feature to be taken into account by the teacher is that the motivation in the L2, is a dynamic process, not static and that it fluctuates continuously with other factors. That is why the more recurrent demotivation factors in the EFL students should be taken into consideration in advance, allowing the teacher to establish strategies that mitigate and cope with negative impact on student motivation (Dörnyei, 1998; Kim, 2012; Kim & Kim, 2016).

 As a final conclusion, it is considered necessary to deepen into these studies in other areas and urban and social contexts of the Colombian country with mixed focus research, due to the fact that the results are limited to a quantitative horizon. This aspect can limit the depth and understanding of the findings, and falling into bias or failure to consider other demotivating factors in learning English as a foreign language, and that can be specified from a qualitative perspective.

This study presented here has been supported by the scholarship Fellow-Mundus, project Mundus Action 2 programme of the European Union, TG2LA-2014-3089; GRIAL and GE20 TEAM, This research is performed within the PhD Program in Education and Knowledge Society of the University of Salamanca.

Ahmed, S. (2013). The current practices of teaching grammar in CLT at secondary school level in Bangladesh: Problems and probable solutions. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 3(8), 1328.

Alavinia, P., & Sehat, R. (2012). A Probe into the Main Demotivating Factors among Iranian EFL Learners. English Language Teaching, 5(6), 9-35.

Bastidas, J. A. (2002). EFL in the Colombian high schools: From ivory tower to the poorest high school in Colombia. Teoría y práctica de la enseñanza del inglés, 140-157.

Bastidas, J. A., & Muñoz, I. (2011). A diagnosis of English language teaching in public elementary schools in Pasto, Colombia. HOW Journal, 18(1), 95-111.

Bekleyen, N. (2011). Demotivating factors in the EFL environment. Frontiers of Language and Teaching, 2, 151-156.

Boo, Z., Dörnyei, Z., & Ryan, S. (2015). L2 motivation research 2005–2014: Understanding a publication surge and a changing landscape. System, 55, 145-157.

Brown, H. D. (2000). Principles of language learning and teaching. New York: Addison Wesley-Longman.

Bryman, A. (2001). Social research methods. Oxford University Press. UK

Chambers, G. (1993). Taking the ‘de’out of demotivation. Language Learning Journal, 7(1), 13-16.

Dörnyei, Z. (1994). Motivation and motivating in the foreign language classroom. The modern language journal, 78(3), 273-284.

Dörnyei, Z. (1998). Motivation in second and foreign language learning. Language teaching, 31(3), 117-135.

Dörnyei, Z., & Clément, R. (2001). Motivational characteristics of learning different target languages: Results of a nationwide survey. Motivation and second language acquisition, 23, 399-432.

Dörnyei, Z., & Ottó, I. (1998). Motivation in action: A process model of L2 motivation.

Dörnyei, Z., & Schmidt, R. (2001). Motivation and second language acquisition (Vol. 23). Natl Foreign Lg Resource Ctr.

Dörnyei, Z. (2001a). Teaching and Researching Motivation Harlow, England.

Dörnyei, Z. (2001b). New themes and approaches in second language motivation research. Annual review of applied linguistics, 21, 43-59.

Dörnyei, Z., & Ushioda, E. (2011). Teaching and Researching Motivation. Harlow, England. New York, Longman.

Dörnyei, Z., & Ushioda, E. (2013). Teaching and researching: Motivation. Routledge.

EPI, E. Education first English proficiency index. (2018). Retrieved June 15, 2018, from, https://www.ef.com.co/epi/.

Falout, J., Elwood, J., & Hood, M. (2009). Demotivation: Affective states and learning outcomes. System, 37(3), 403-417.

Gardner, R. C. (1985). Social psychology and second language learning: The role of attitudes and motivation. Arnold.

Gardner, R. C. (2007). Motivation and second language acquisition. Porta Linguarum: revista internacional de didáctica de las lenguas extranjeras, (8) 9-20.

Gardner, R. C. (2010). Motivation and second language acquisition: The socio-educational model (Vol. 10). Peter Lang.

Ghenghesh, P. (2010). The Motivation of L2 Learners: Does It Decrease with Age?. English Language Teaching, 3(1), 128-141.

Gkonou, C. (2013). A diary study on the causes of English language classroom anxiety. International Journal of English Studies, 13(1), 51-68. doi: 10.6018/ijes/2013/1/134681.

Gorham, J., & Christophel, D. M. (1992). Students’ perceptions of teacher behaviors as motivating and demotivating factors in college classes. Communication Quarterly, 40(3), 239-252.

Hamada, Y. (2008). Demotivators for Japanese Teenagers. Journal of Pan-Pacific Association of Applied Linguistics, 12(2), 1-23.

Hamada, Y., & Kito, K. (2008). Demotivation in Japanese high schools. JALT 2007 conference proceedings, 168-178.

Hasegawa, A. (2004) Student demotivation in the foreign language classroom. Takushoku Language Studies 107(11), 119–36.

Hosseini, A., & Jafari, M. (2014). Possible demotivating factors for secondary school students. International Journal of Language Learning and Applied Linguistics World (IJLLALW), 5(3), 188-201.

ICFES. (2018). Instituto Colombiano para la Evaluación de la Educación. Retrieved April 8, 2018, from https://www2.icfesinteractivo.gov.co/resultadosSaber/resultadosSaber11/clasificacion_planteles.html

Jurisevic, M., & Pizorn, K. (2013). Young Foreign Language Learners’ Motivation-A Slovenian Experience. Porta Linguarum: revista internacional de didáctica de las lenguas extranjeras, (19), 179-198.

Keblawi, F. (2005). Demotivation among Arab learners of English as a foreign language. In Proceedings of the Second International Online Conference on Second and Foreign Language Teaching and Research-September (pp. 16-18).

Kikuchi, K., & Sakai, H. (2007). Japanese learners’ demotivation to study English: A survey study. JALT journal.

Kim, K. J. (2009a). Demotivating factors in secondary English education. English Teaching, 64(4), 249-267.

Kim, K. J. (2009b). A comparative analysis of demotivation in secondary English classes. English Language & Literature Teaching, 15(4), 75-94.

Kim, K. J. (2012). A structural relationship between demotivational factors and English achievement for high school students. English Language & Literature Teaching, 18(4), 71-92.

Kim, T. Y. (2011). Korean elementary school students’ English learning demotivation: A comparative survey study. Asia Pacific Education Review, 12(1), 1-11.

Kim, T. Y., & Kim, Y. (2016). EFL learning demotivation in the Korean context: Similarities and differences across school levels. English Language & Literature Teaching, 22(1), 135-156.

Kim. T. Y., & Seo, H.S. (2012). Elementary school students’ foreign language learning demotivation: A mixed methods study of Korean EFL students. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 21(1), 160- 171.

Lamb, M. (2007). The impact of school on EFL learning motivation: An Indonesian case study. Tesol Quarterly, 41(4), 757-780.

Lee, J., & Lee, C. (2011). Demotivating factors in learning English for elementary school students. Primary English Education, 17, 327-356.

Li, C., & Zhou, T. (2017). An Exploratory Study on the Relationship between Demotivation and Academic Fields among Chinese EFL Learners. Arab World English Journal (AWEJ), 8(1), 42-54.

Medina, C. J.  (2006). Motivación interna y rendimiento académico de los estudiantes de inglés de la ULA Táchira. Acción pedagógica, 15(1), 64-73.

Meshkat, M., & Hassani, M. (2012). Demotivating factors in learning English: The case of Iran. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 31, 745-749.

Muhonen, J. (2004). Second language demotivation: Factors that discourage pupils from learning the English language.

Oxford, R. L. (1998). The unravelling tapestry: Teacher and course characteristics associated with demotivation in the language classroom. Demotivation in foreign language learning. TESOL’98 Congress, Seattle, WA.

Patiño, C. (2018). Conflicto Armado, Estado Y Homicidios En Colombia: Una Aproximación a Nivel Local (Armed Conflict, State and Homicide in Colombia: A Local-Level Approach). Documento CEDE, (2018-21).

Pinzón, G. A. (2011). Experiencia pedagógica en bilingüismo: uso de estrategias en el aprendizaje del inglés desde las tecnologías de la información y la comunicación. Hacia una investigación de impacto, el salinero Unadista 3(1), 3-15.

Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: Classic definitions and new directions. Contemporary educational psychology, 25(1), 54-67.

Sakai, H., & Kikuchi, K. (2009). An analysis of demotivators in the EFL classroom. System, 37(1), 57-69.

Warrington, S. D., & Jeffrey, D. M. (2005). A rationale for passivity and de-motivation revealed: An interpretation of inventory results among freshman English students. Journal of Language and Learning, 3(2), 312-335.

Woolfolk, A. E., Hoy, A. W., Hughes, M., & Walkup, V. (2007). Psychology in education. Pearson Education.

1. Ph.D Student in Education in the Knowledge Society at the Research Institute for Educational Sciences, University of Salamanca, Spain; gabaunza@usal.es

2. Ph.D Education and Professor in the Department of Teaching, Organization and Research Methods at the Research Institute for Educational Sciences; University of Salamanca, Spain; fma@usal.es

3. Ph.D Education and Senior Lecturer in Research Methodology an Educational Evaluation, at the Research Institute for Educational Sciences, University of Salamanca , Spain; mjrconde@usal.es

4. Ph.D. Student Language Studies, specialized in Clil and Professor of the pedagogy of national and foreign languages at the National University of Chimborazo, Ecuador; mavalos@unach.edu.ec