Introduction

Comprehension is a complex phenomenon that involves a diversity of aspects and processes, which makes it quite challenging to study or define ( Rodrigo, 2018; Soliman, 2019). The complexity of comprehension could be attributed to the knowledge of the reading genre ( Zwaan, 1994; Fountas and Pinnell, 2001; Best, Floyd and Mcnamara, 2008), text characteristics ( van den Broek and Kendeou, 2017), world knowledge ( Van Dijk and Kintsch, 1983; Kintsch, 1988; Cassany, 2009), mood and motivation while reading ( Ellis et al., 1997 ; Law, 2009) and the use of metacognitive strategies to regulate, monitor and reflect on reading process ( Flavell, 1976, Baker, 2008; Ke and Chan, 2017).

Furthermore, comprehension is a process that is constrained by internal, cognitive, memory and attention aspects; and other external factors such as social and cultural context ( De Vega, 1984; Carrell, 1991; Wurr, 2003; Arias, 2015; Münster and Knoeferle, 2018). Moreover, comprehension takes place in a classroom situational context in which specialized disciplinary content is discussed ( Contreras, 1990; Solé and Castells, 2004; Petkovic and Georgijev, 2020). In this context, interpreting text is driven by certain personal reading goals that could be defined as the reasons behind reading a text ( Graesser et al., 1994 ; Graesser and Feng, 2015; Yeari, van den Broek and Oudega, 2015; Britt et al., 2018 ; Parodi et al., 2019 ). Those reasons could vary according to the reader’s interest, such as reading to learn, reading to find information, reading for pleasure, etc. Also, there are institutional goals established by the professional or academic institution that hosts the reading activity and that, in terms of Parodi (2011), aim to “guide or orient the reader’s comprehension from the point of view of the institutional system in which the reader has to participate in a specific task and based on its results, he/she will be evaluated, qualified or judged” (p. 151).

This interest in the reading goals in L1 has been expanded in L2 studies due to its relevance to learning in academic settings. Investigations, in this sense, have focused on how comprehension could be driven by certain purposes in different text genres. Especially expository and narrative texts have been the priority of previous investigations because they are the most frequently used in classroom context ( Mesgarshahr and Alavi, 2019).

In this regard, Chodkiewicz (2013) stresses the relevance of reading goals in the development of strategies to interpret the text in L2. At the same time, the author raises the effectiveness of goal-oriented comprehension as it determines the complexity of the task, what exactly the student is supposed to learn from the text and how. The task design itself could determine what strategies are necessary for its completion and for achieving the reading goal ( Chodkiewicz, 2019).

In this context, Horiba and Fukaya (2015) studied the effect of rea- ding goal, topic familiarity and language proficiency in relation to the reading processes and learning from texts in L2. Their results suggest taking into consideration, while designing material and tasks, the need to balance between linguistic processing related to the L2 language proficiency and conceptual processing that topic familiarity involves.

In Kimura (2014) language proficiency seemed to be correlated to achieving the reading goal in the case of EFL Japanese learners except for expository theme content. On the other hand, reading instruction and goal-oriented reading helped participants to determine the grade of coherence of narrative text ( Ushiro et al., 2018 ). Moreover, using eye tracking methodology, Dirix Vander Beken et al. (2020) proved that L2 learners had longer reading time in the study condition, when their task was to answer questions, than in informational reading of expository texts. Which means that readers need more time when the task requires studying text to get specific information and answering questions than having only to read through that text.

Even though this previous literature in L2 has covered a variety of important variables in the study of reading goals, it did not cover the instrumental motivation of the L2 learners. This motivation is conceived as the reason why students are learning a second language ( MacIntyre et al., 1998 ). This motivation for learning could be a possible-related aspect that determines students’ reading goals. However, previous literature on motivation during reading has focused on other aspects such as professors’ beliefs about reading ( Mariño, 2018), reading format ( Vásquez et al., 2009 ) and the relation between motivation and reading comprehension ( Schiefele et al, 2012; Wigfield et al., 2016 ; Stranovska and Gadusova, 2020).

This affirms that there is a lack of studies centered on the relation between the motivation of learning L2 and the institutional goals set for the reading task.

For this reason, the key research objective for this investigation is determining the relation between L2 learner motivation and personal and institutional reading goals. To address this issue, a qualitative case study has been held in Spanish L2 exchange program in a Chilean University. In this investigation, 60 students and 4 academics have participated, and data has been collected by a survey, eight focus groups for students and eight semistructured interviews with professors. Results highlight that the instrumental motivation of the learner influences personal goals and could get in conflict with institutional reading goals in case they do not line up.

To achieve this objective, this paper is organized in the following structure: the theoretical background about reading goals is presented. Subsequently, a description of the methodological procedures and results is made. The work closure is dedicated to the discussion and conclusions about these results, which, in turn, raise the possible future research directions.

Theoretical framework

Constructionist theory ( Graesser et al., 1994 ) is based on the principle of the search after meaning, which is assuming that reading goals determine the constructed situation model ( Van Dijk and Kintsch, 1983).

This theory embraces the fulfillment of reading goals as a main assumption and this goal could be reading to learn ( Grabe and Stoller, 2019); to search for information ( Grabe and Stoller, 2002); to discuss readings ( Lawrence and Snow, 2010); for entertainment ( Van den Broek et al., 2001 ); to present a text ( Yeari et al., 2015 ), among others.

In this sense, the constructionist theory of Graesser et al. (1994) considers readers responsible for a deliberate construction of a coherent situation model by establishing reading goals to interpret it. Under the previous considerations, it is important to insist that from this perspective reading objectives determine the strategies and document sources used to interpret it, whether in L1 or L2 ( Magliano et al., 1999 ; Graesser, 2007; Yeari et al., 2015 ; Britt et al., 2014 ; Horiba and Fukaya, 2015; Mesgarshahr and Alavi, 2019).

Despite the focus of previous literature on the study of reading goals in L2, there is a significant gap that explains the relationship between these goals and learner instrumental motivation. As per Yu and Downing (2012) this motivation aims to learn language “as a means of achieving practical goals such as improving one’s economic status or getting social recognition” (p. 459). In this sense, previous work has discussed the influence of instrumental motivation on learning languages such as Arabic, English, German, Spanish, Persian, as L2 (Haghani and Maleki, 2018; Nailufar, 2018; Lu et al., 2019 ; Khaleghizadeh et al., 2020 ; Rahardjo and Pertiwi, 2020; Ametova, 2020)

In this context, previous work in instrumental motivation in Spanish as a second language recognize it as a predictor of successful learning process the focus is still on oral proficiency development and cultural interest other than the rest of language skills ( Hernández, 2006; Spychała-Wawrzyniak and Bustinza, 2016; Khong et al., 2017 ; Lu et al., 2019 ). For this motive, this paper discusses the role of this instrumental motivation in determining the reading goals, considering reading task as a main activity that students have to accomplish in a teaching setting of Spanish L2.

Methodology

Design

A qualitative case study that adopts exploratory and descriptive scope with the aim of analyzing in depth students’ motivations for learning Spanish as a second language and its relationship with their reading goals and the ones established by the institution. The institution in this case study is represented by an academic exchange program held at a Chilean University.

Its exploratory character is due to the lack of previous literature in the study of learning motivation and reading goals in Spanish as a second language in the disciplines of History and Literature. Exploring this unfamiliar topic is relevant for professors and mobility programs, as it could help in designing tailored education curricula for this group of students. Also, it could help learners to improve their language and choose the best program of study for them based on the reason why they are learning it.

Participants

Sixty undergraduates from the USA and four professors from Chile participating in a university exchange program during the first semester of 2019 specialized in Spanish B2-C1 proficiency levels. Students presented proficiency certificates to prove their domain of the language and joined the investigation after signing an informed consent. The B2-C1 language proficiency levels have been preferred to avoid any possible linguistic or grammatical issues that could affect understanding the texts and achieving the reading goals.

Procedure

Eight semistructured interviews have been held with the four academics. Two with each one of the professors to get more details about the academic institutional reading goals. Then, based on this finding’s students were invited to participate in one of eight focus groups depending on their availability to share their reading goals. Finally, they were asked to complete a short five minute survey about their learning motivation. Interviews and focus groups have been audio recorded and transcribed. At the same time, survey replies have been systematized in Excel files after exporting them from the SurveyMonkey platform. This variety of instruments allowed contrasting the different perspectives of reading goals and the motivation behind learning the second language itself.

Data analysis

Content analysis has been applied using the Nvivo 12 data analysis tool ( QSR, 2018). Direct citations from the participants’ quotes have been selected to get a full detailed record of all frequent patterns, organize them in themes and start interpreting their relations with each other ( Maxwell, 2012).

Results

Results are explained in three major themes that have been identified by the content analysis. Themes and subthemes have been organized according to the frequency calculated automatically by the Nvivo 12 program.

The first theme: Motivation of the reader to learn L2 during an exchange program

This theme is associated with the student’s motivations in learning Spanish as a second language. The reasons for learning the language, to some extent, determine the interests of the students as readers in the contents taught and their interaction with the texts. As shown in Table 1, the reasons reported by students in the survey allowed to summarize this theme into two motivations, which were materialized in two sub-themes: the improvement of oral fluency and the development of an effective resume.

According to what, students reported in the survey that strengthening their oral communication skills is a priority during the exchange program. While written Spanish was in second place as shown in Figure 1.

Possibly, this preference is due to a belief of the learners that oral fluency determines the mastering of the language, as confirmed by one of the History professors in the semi-structured interview:

(1) I think the reason why American students come to Chile is because of the language. For this reason, we have to make them speak, discuss in Spanish and that’s why the priority is for communication and there are those who talk more than others (I2. Francisco.MH.13, Professor).

The second motivation behind learning Spanish is outlined to strengthen the resume, as one of the professors confirms in the interview:

(2) Today I think that many people study Spanish in this case to learn a little about the country, but also to offer a strong curriculum vitae (I2. Camilo.CC.30, Professor).

To know more about this motivation, survey questions focused on the interests that students had in learning Spanish, as detailed in Figure 1. In this survey, each of the students reported at least two reasons that motivated them to learn the language. Among these reasons, priority was given to enhancing the curriculum and getting access to employment opportunities and making learning of this second language easier. The order of frequency of the reasons reported in the survey by the students were the following:

The second theme: The reading goals of the L2 Spanish learner

Learners placed reading goals as a key factor for text comprehension. These goals were stated by them during the focus group sessions and have been sorted by frequency, as detailed in Table 2, in five reading goals.

In this work, the reading goals are conceived as the learner’s own goals that he/she intends to achieve throughout by the reading process and are meant to guide his/her process until this goal is fulfilled. This theme consists of five sub-themes that complement each other. The first one sets reading to learn as a reading goal for the Spanish L2 student, according to the statement of one of the participants in the focus group.

(3) I use reading as a practical way to learn and understand from texts (FG1. Camilo.CC.83, Student 8)

The second subtheme emphasizes reading to write as a reading goal. In the sense that writing is an epistemic tool that can help the student to clarify the content he or she is reading and reflect on it:

(4) Because, in most of my classes, I have to write essays for my class assignments and when I have to write an essay, I have to evaluate the texts, have an argument and discussion of not only what the text says, but explain why it says it (FG1. Pascual.UH.50, Student2).

The third sub-theme is oriented towards reading to present the reading goal of the L2 Spanish learner. In coherence with this goal, the student must demonstrate his or her knowledge of the texts he or she has read through oral presentation:

(5) It is because each person needs to present his or her short story and this helps to improve oral skills, public speaking, increase vocabulary and speak with confidence about a text (FG1. Camilo. CC.46, Student 1.2).

The fourth sub-theme conceives reading as an exercise in which the student can learn and teach new vocabulary to the rest of his or her classmates:

(6) I read in Spanish because I would like to learn Spanish because I would like to learn the words that are used in everyday life to use with natives and teach them to others (FG2. Pamela.CL.73, Student 3.2).

Finally, in the fifth sub-theme, students set the search for information as a priority for their reading because it somehow helps them meet the reading goal. Especially if this goal is associated with a task, such as reading for writing or presenting, as one of the students in the focus group explained:

(7) I read to get further information, to learn something or to analyze a work (FG1. Pascual.HU.72, Student 2).

It is worth mentioning that reading for writing is a more frequent sub-theme than reading for presentation, since students consider reading for writing to be a more complex task than presenting. From the students’ point of view, presenting about a text is simpler due to the facility of incorporating multimodal elements:

(8) I can put videos in a presentation because they help make the presentation simpler and add necessary details. Meanwhile, in an essay I cannot do this, and I have to make the description of everything, and this is very complex (FG2. Francisco.HU.109, Student 2).

Reading to learn is the most recurrent goal for students, since they are pursuing a learning process regardless of the task involved (Grabe and Stoller, 2019). Probably, for this reason, reading to write and to present have less frequency in students’ statements because they did not link learning to task accomplishment.

Third theme: Institutional reading goals

These goals were imposed by the academics of the program, such as the academic coordinators and the professors, as explained in Table 3. They controlled the reading task because they determined the frequency of assignment and expected performance. In this case study, the task was assigned every week, whereas a presentation was held individually by each student in Spanish language without using the native language for one hour and a half.

In terms of those institutional goals, the first sub-theme and the most frequent one implies oral presentation as a primary activity to enhance students’ oral and analytical skills.

(9) The strongest academic work is this presentation because there is some research. And when I say research, I mean that the person presenting has to read the short story and has to do a critical analysis of it as a result of several readings (I2. Camilo.CC. 41, Professor)

Reading for presentation varies between a formative or summative assessment, depending on the institution’s goal and the educational needs of the learners. In contrast, the second sub-theme prioritized writing as a reading goal in which the task requires writing an essay.

(10) Then, they are obligated to read because the reading assessment requires writing an essay. In simple terms, I force them to read even though they may have open access to all the texts. They are obligated to highlight the texts or to summarize them to develop a good essay afterward (I2. Pascual.HU.48, Professor).

The third sub-theme addressed reading to learn and teaching new vocabulary to others as an institutional goal, since it involved a task in which students had to demonstrate their learning:

(11) There is a task in which they have to extract vocabulary from the text and teach it using a game (I2. Camilo.CC. 85.Professor).

The fourth sub-theme was complemented by the third one by considering the acquisition of new knowledge by learning as an essential condition for the development of a reading task in an academic context:

(12) These readings are intended for them to learn on their own from the texts (I2. Francisco.UH. 9. Profesor).

In the fifth and last sub-theme, the reading identified the search for information as an institutional objective to ensure that students focus on the most relevant points of the text:

(13) The student has to look for information about the author. At the same time, he has these five steps to make this presentation and the rest of the students basically have to come and participate and get certain information from the text (I2. Camilo.CC. 41.Professor).

Reading for presentation is more frequent than reading for writing, and this is also consistent with students’ interests in joining the exchange program to enhance their oral skills and with their preference for oral presentations as a course activity.

The analysis showed that, in addition, the texts were assigned with a different purpose than the student’s own reading goal. For this reason, the institutional reading goal did not coincide with the students’ one, since the program was focused on the fulfillment of an academic task such as presenting a text. The student, on the other hand, was looking to learn from text and that is why they did not match.

Discussion and conclusions

The objective of this investigation was to explore the relationship between instrumental learning motivation and the reading goals of both the learner and the institution hosting the reading activity. To achieve this goal, the analysis lies in triangulating the data collected by three instruments to provide a detailed and complete description of the case studied. Survey and focus groups helped to gather information from the perspective of the student and compare it to what professors reported in the semistructured interview. This offers an explanation for L2 learning motivations and their relation to reading goals according to professors and students’ statements.

The analysis of the data that has been collected through those instruments indicates that students’ learning motivation is associated with their reading goal. In the sense that students were learning Spanish for practical reasons, and this explained their preference to learn from texts without necessarily having to accomplish a task.

At the same time, results indicate that L2 learning motivation is not coherent with the institutional reading goals. Perhaps the reason behind this is that students believe that courses during the exchange program focus on communicative oral competence development. However, in this case, study, courses were specialized in specific disciplinary content.

This may highlight that Spanish L2 classrooms started to present a context of constant change in which exchange programs do not only offer general courses to improve students four basic language skills, but also might involve specializing in specific academic or professional fields ( Petkovic and Georgijev, 2020). As a result, students, depending on their motivations, should take this overview in consideration while choosing the mobility program they want to join and while enrolling in courses.

Additionally, exchange programs could send a survey to students before enrollment to ask them why they learn this second language and offer tailored courses for them in coherence with their goals. This would help exchange programs identify the student’s profile and their needs to guarantee an enjoyable learning experience and offer useful insights. This means that ideally, institutional goals should be aligned with students’ personal reading and learning goals. For example, making readings obligatory or expecting students to review a complex reading material will not help students achieve their goals. Mostly, students will end up exhausted and with less motivation to read through this pedagogic material. Institutional reading goals do not have to strictly match the students’ one, as long as the task is challenging but achievable. So, long texts with less common vocabulary will not be convenient for students who seek to learn Spanish to chat with friends.

Finally, it is important to reflect on the notion of learning provided by the previous literature because when professors assign a presentation for a reading task, they probably want students to learn from the text while they prepare their oral presentation. Moreover, asking students to write an essay is an opportunity to analyze texts, criticize them and transform this information into new insights that express what students believe about certain topics and this to imply learning from text. So, there is a difference between what students and the institution mean by learning, because for students, any exposure to new words could be classified as learning while learning for the institution is related to task completion. This highlights the need of the literature focused on reading goals to rethink goal categories and the conceptual separation between them because this overlap might be confusing and sometimes misleading. As learning for students in this case study, for example, is totally different from learning as conceived by the institution.

The lack of previous research has prevented comparing findings regarding this overlap. For this reason, future work is needed to rethink and reevaluate the notion of learning and to what extent it could be the same for students and professors. Also, it remains a pending challenge to explore those reading goals in other exchange programs and in other languages and compare to what extent they change according to students’ L2 learning motivations.

References

Arias, L. B. (2015). Influencia cultural en la motivación para el aprendizaje del inglés como lengua extranjera. Revista Interamericana de investigación, educación y pedagogía, 8(2), 341-371.

Baker, L. (2008). Metacognitive development in reading: Contributors and consequences. In K. Mokhtari, & R. Sheorey (Eds.), Reading strategies of first and second – language learners: See how they read (pp. 25-42). Norwood: Christopher-Gordon.

Best, R. M., Floyd, R. G. & Mcnamara, D. S. (2008). Differential competencies contributing to children’s comprehension of narrative and expository texts. Reading psychology, 29(2), 137-164. https://doi.org/10.1080/02702710801963951

Britt, M. A., Richter, T. & Rouet, J. F. (2014). Scientific literacy: The role of goal-directed reading and evaluation in understanding scientific information. Educational Psychologist, 49(2), 104-122. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2014.916217

Britt, M., Rouet, J. & Durik, A. (2018). Literacy beyond text comprehension. A theory of purposeful reading. Routledge.

Carrell, P. (1991). Second language reading: Reading ability or language proficiency? Applied linguistics, 12(2), 159-179. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/12.2.159

Cassany, D. (2009). Leer, comprender e interpretar en EFE en línea. In Martínez, I. & Vera Luján, A.(eds.) Actas del XX Congreso Internacional de ASELE El español en contextos específicos: enseñanza e investigación (pp. 19-40). Cantabria: Comillas.

Chodkiewicz, H. (2013). Reading as a purpose-driven process: Taking an L2 reader perspective. In D. Gabryś-Barker, E. Piechurska-Kuciel, & J. Zybert (Eds.), Investigations in Teaching and Learning Languages, Second Language Learning and Teaching (pp. 79-96). Berlin: Springer International Publishing.

Chodkiewicz, H. (2019). Strategic reading: Towards a better understanding of its role in L2/FL learning and teaching contexts. Lublin Studies in Modern Languages and Literature, 43(3), 61-72. https://doi.org/10.17951/lsmll.2019.43.3.61-72

Contreras, J. (1990). Enseñanza, currículum y profesorado: introducción crítica a la didáctica. Madrid: Aka.

De Vega, M. (1984). Introducción a la psicología cognitiva. Madrid: Alianza Psicología.

Dirix, N., Vander Beken, H., De Bruyne, E., Brysbaert, M. & Duyck, W. (2020). Reading Text When Studying in a Second Language: An Eye-Tracking Study. Reading Research Quarterly, 55(3), 371-397. https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.277

Ellis, H., Ottaway, S., Varner, L., Becker, A. & Moore, B. (1997). Emotion, motivation, and text comprehension: The detection of contradictions in passages. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 126(2), 131-146. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.126.2.131

Flavell, J. H. (1976). Metacognitive aspects of problem solving. In L. B. Resnick (Ed.). The nature of intelligence (pp. 231–235). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Fountas, I. & Pinnell, G. S. (2001). Guiding readers and writers grades 3–6: Teaching comprehension, genre, and content literacy. Portsmouth: Heinemann.

Grabe, W. & Stoller, F. L. (2002). Teaching and researching reading. London: Pearson Education.

Grabe, W. & Stoller, F. L. (2019). Reading to learn: why and how content-based instructional frameworks facilitate the process. In K. Koda, & J. Yamashita (Eds.), Reading to Learn in a Foreign Language: An Integrated Approach to FL Instruction and Assessment (pp. 9–28). New York: Routledge.

Graesser, A. C. (2007). An introduction to strategic reading comprehension. In D. S. McNamara (Ed.), Reading comprehension strategies: Theories, interventions, and technologies (pp. 137–172). Mahwah: Erlbaum

Graesser, A. C., Singer, M. & Trabasso, T. (1994). Constructing inferences during narrative text comprehension. Psychological Review, 101 (3), 371-395. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.101.3.371

Graesser, A., Li, H. & Feng, S. (2015). Constructing inferences in naturalistic reading contexts. In E.O’Brien, A. Cook, & R. Lorch (Eds.), Inferences during reading (pp. 290-320). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Hernández, T. (2006). Integrative Motivation as a Predictorof Success in the Intermediate Foreign Language Classroom. Foreign Language Annals, 39(4), 605- 617. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1944-9720.2006.tb02279.x

Horiba, Y. & Fukaya, K. (2015). Reading and learning from L2 text: Effects of reading goal, topic familiarity, and language proficiency. Reading in a Foreign Language, 27, 22–46.

Ke, S. & Chan, S. (2017). Strategy use in L2 Chinese reading: The effect of L1 background and L2 proficiency. System, (66), 27-38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2017.03.005

Khaleghizadeh, S., Vakilifard, A. & Kamyabi, A. (2020). Ideal Self, Ought-to Self, Integrative, and Instrumental Motivations Among Non-Iranian Learners of Persian: A Case Study of Chinese and Korean Learners. Language Related Research, 11(2), 287-314.

Khong, H. K., Hassan, N. H. & Ramli, N. (2017). Motivation and gender differences in learning Spanish as a foreign language in a Malaysian technical university. Malaysian. Journal of Learning and Instruction, 14(2), 59-83. https://doi.org/10.32890/mjli2017.14.2.3

Kimura, Y. (2014). Theme Comprehension in Expository Texts: Effects of Reading Goals and L2 Reading Proficiency. ARELE: Annual Review of English Language Education in Japan, 25, 111-126. https://doi.org/10.20581/arele.25.0_111

Kintsch, W. (1988). The role of knowledge in discourse comprehension: A construction-integration model. Psychological review, 95(2), 163. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.95.2.163

Law, Y. (2009). The role of attribution beliefs, motivation and strategy use in Chinese fifth-graders’ reading comprehension. Educational research, 51(1), 77-95. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131880802704764

Lawrence, J. F. & Snow, C. E. (2010). Oral discourse and reading. In M. L. Kamil, P. D. Pearson, E. B. Moe, & P. P. Afflerbach (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (pp. 320-337). New York: Routledge.

Lu, X., Zheng, Y. & Ren, W. (2019). Motivation for learning Spanish as a foreign language: The case of Chinese L1 speakers at university level. Círculo de Lingüística Aplicada a la Comunicación, 79, 79–98. https://dx.doi.org/10.5209/clac.65649

Macintyre, P. D., Clément, R., Dörnyei, Z. & Noels, K. A. (1998). Conceptualizing willingness to communicate in a L2: A situational model of L2 confidence and affiliation. The Modern Language Journal, 82(4), 545-562. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.15404781.1998.tb05543.x

Magliano, J. P., Trabasso, T. & Graesser, A. C. (1999). Strategic processing during comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91 (4), 615–629. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.91.4.615

Mariño, E. Y. H. (2018). Comprensión de lectura desde la percepción de los docentes de inglés-lengua extranjera. Revista interamericana de investigación, educación y pedagogía, 11(2), 61-76.

Maxwell, J. (2012). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach. Thousand Oaks: Sage publications.

Mesgarshahr, A. & Alavi, S. M. (2019). Understanding L2 Reading Cognitive Processes: The Case of the L2 Reader’s Goal. The Reading Matrix: An International Online Journal, 19(1), 206-225.

Münster, K. & Knoeferle, P. (2018). Extending Situated Language Comprehension (Accounts) with Speaker and Comprehender Characteristics: Toward Socially Situated Interpretation. Frontiers in psychology, (8), 22-67. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.02267

Nailufar, Y. (2018). Analysis of Motivations to study English and Arabic. English Education Journal, 9(2), 328-345.

Parodi, G. (2011). La Teoría de la Comunicabilidad: Notas para una concepción integral de la comprensión de textos escritos. Revista signos, 44(76), 145-167. https://doi.org/10.4067/S0718-09342011000200004

Parodi, G., Moreno-de-León, T., Julio, C. & Burdiles, G. (2019). Google or Gutenberg Generation: Chilean university students’ reading habits and reading purposes. [Generación Google o Generación Gutenberg: Hábitos y propósitos de lectura en estudiantes universitarios chilenos]. Comunicar: Revista científica iberoamericana de comunicación y educación, (58), 85-94. https://doi.org/10.3916/C58-2019-08

Petkovic, I. V. & Georgijev, I. (2020). La enseñanza de español con fines específicos: propuestas básicas para el diseño de un curso de español para los negocios (nivel B1)/Spanish teaching for specific purposes: basic suggestions for the design of a business Spanish course (level B1). Colindancias-Revista de la Red de Hispanistas de Europa Central, (10), 295-312.

QSR International. (2018). NVivo 12 pro. London: QSR International Pty Ltd.

Rahardjo, A. & pertiwi, S. (2020). Learning Motivation and Students’ Achievement in Learning English. JELITA, 1(2), 56-64.

Rodrigo, V. (2018). La comprensión lectora en la enseñanza del español LE/L2: de la teoría a la práctica. New York: Routledge.

Ametova, O. (2020). The influence of integrative motivation and instrumental motivation on learning English as a Foreign Language. Journal of Critical Reviews, 7(12), 942-945.

Solé, I. & Castells, N. (2004). Aprender mediante la lectura y la escritura: ¿existen diferencias en función del dominio disciplinar. Lectura y vida, 25(4), 6-17.

Schiefele, U., Schaffner, E., Möller, J., & Wigfield, A. (2012). Dimensions of reading motivation and their relation to reading behavior and competence. Reading research quarterly, 47(4), 427-463. https://doi.org/10.1002/RRQ.030

Soliman, M. S (2019). The conception of comprehension in two eye movement tracking models: Just and Carpenter (1980) and Rayner and Pollatsek (1989). Estudios de Lingüística Aplicada, (70), 95-116. https://doi.org/10.22201/enallt.01852647p.2019.70.878

Stranovska, E., & Gadusova, Z. (2020). Learners’ success and self-esteem in foreign language reading comprehension. Education and Self Development, 15(3), 109-119. https://doi.org/10.26907/esd15.3.10

Spychała-Wawrzyniak, M. & Bustinza, L. S. (2016). La motivación de los alumnos polacos para el aprendizaje del español como lengua extranjera. Studia Romanica Posnaniensia, 43(3), 85-102. https://doi.org/10.14746/strop.2016.433.006

Ushiro, Y., Hamada, A., Mori, Y., Hosoda, M., Tada, G., Kamimura, K. & Okawara, N. (2018). Goal-oriented L2 reading processes in maintaining the coherence of narrative comprehension. Jacet journal, 62(10), 109-128. https://doi.org/10.32234/jacetjournal.62.0_109

Van Den Broek, P. & Kendeou, P. (2017). Development of reading comprehension: Change and continuity in the ability to construct coherent representations. In Cain, K., Compton, D.L., & Parrila, R.K. (Eds.), Theories of Reading Development (283- 307). Netherlands: John Benjamins Publishing Company

Van Den Broek, P., Lorch, R. F., Linderholm, T. & Gustafson, M. (2001). The effects of readers’ goals on inference generation and memory for texts. Memory & Cognition, 29(8), 1081-1087. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03206376

Van Dijk, T. & Kintsch, W. (1983). Strategies of Discourse Comprehension. New York: Academic Press.

Vásquez, C. A., Romero, A., & Molina, R. Y. (2009). Estrategias pedagógicas para la motivación lectora a través de un software de lectura interactiva. Revista Interamericana de Investigación, Educación y Pedagogía, 2(2), 19-30.

Wigfield, A., Gladstone, J. R., & Turci, L. (2016). Beyond cognition: Reading motivation and reading comprehension. Child development perspectives, 10(3), 190-195. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdep.12184

Wurr, A. (2003). Reading in a Second Language: A Reading Problem or a Language Problem? Journal of College Reading and Learning, 33(2), 157-169. https://doi.org/10.1080/10790195.2003.10850146

Yeari, M., Van Den Broek, P. & Oudega, M. (2015). Processing and memory of central versus peripheral information as a function of reading goals: Evidence from eye- movements. Reading and writing, 28(8), 1071-1097. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-015-9561-4

Yu, B. & Downing, K. (2012). Determinants of international students’ adaptation: Examining effects of integrative motivation, instrumental motivation and second language proficiency. Educational studies, 38(4), 457-471. https://doi.org/10.1080/03055698.2011.643111

Zwaan, R. (1994). Effect of genre expectations on text comprehension. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 20(4), 920. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.20.4.920

Autor notes

Informação adicional

Cite this article: Soliman, M. (2023). Instrumental motivation and Reading goals: Case study of Spanish L2 learners in Chile. Revista Interamericana de Investigación, Educación y Pedagogía, 16(2), 213-241. https://doi.org/10.15332/25005421.7897

IR