The document summarizes a study that compared the motivation of adult immigrants participating in language education courses in the Czech Republic and Sweden. A survey was administered to 95 immigrants in the Czech Republic and 222 immigrants in Sweden. The results showed statistically significant differences in motivations between the countries. Immigrants in the Czech Republic were found to be more intrinsically motivated to learn something new, while immigrants in Sweden were more extrinsically motivated to communicate in everyday situations. The document concludes that the countries can learn from each other in improving language education and integration programs.

1. MOTIVATION TO PARTICIPATE IN LANGUAGE EDUCATION
AMONG ADULT IMMIGRANTS
IN THE CZECH REPUBLIC AND SWEDEN
Milena Öbrink Hobzová, Petra Sobková, Jiří Pospíšil
The Sts. Cyril and Methodius Faculty of Theology
Palacký University, Olomouc, Czech Republic

2. Outline
• Introduction
• Migration as a current topic in Czech Republic and Sweden
(including integrational measures in CZ and SWE)
• Adult immigrants in the learing process and their motivation
• A study on motivation
• Conclusion

3. Introduction
 Migration as an issue in the 21st century:
 Through migration, Czech Republic has transformed into a culturally
heterogeneous country.
 X
 Sweden is an example of a country with a long tradition of giving a shelter to
refugees.
 The need for language courses aimed at adult immigrants in both countries.
 The aim:
 A) to determine whether there are any differences in the motivation among
the participants, especially when choosing whether to enter language
learning;
 B) to draw conclusions on whether the two countries can learn from each
other.

4. Migration as a current topic in Czech Republic and
Sweden
− Czech Republic:
− 31st December 2013 - a total number of 441,536 foreigners from
more than 180 countries worldwide (Český statistický úřad 2014).
− The majority of these immigrants come from Ukraine (105 239
immigrants), Slovakia (90 948), Vietnam (57 406), and Russia
(33 415).

5.  Sweden:
 694,662 foreigners from more than 200 countries resided in Sweden in
2013 (SCB 2014).
 These immigrants tend to come from non-European countries (the Middle
East – e. g. Iraq, Iran and Afghanistan, or from Africa – e. g. Somalia).
 However, there are also many labour migrants from the EU in Sweden
(countries such as Poland, Denmark, Germany), and from other
European countries – e.g. Russia (SCB Statistiska centralbyrån 2012).
 Czech Republic – more immigrants for economic reasons X Sweden – more immigrants are
refugees who seek shelter from war.

6. Integrational measures in the Czech Republic
and Sweden
 Czech Republic:
 Concept of integration of foreigners in the Czech Republic since
2005 – aimed at integration third-country immigrants, not EU,
EEA or Swiss citizens, and not refugees (they can participate in
the State integrational program).
 Centers for support of the integration of foreigners - the first one
founded in 2009, all over country in major towns and cities (they
offer free language classes, information on Czech social, health,
and legal systems work etc.) – only for third-country immigrants,
not EU, EEA or Swiss citizens, and not refugees.

7. − Sweden:
− Sverige, framtiden och mångfalden - från invandrarpolitik till
integrationspolitik (1997): the same rights and opportunities
should be guaranteed to all without distinction of nationality,
ethnicity or cultural background (Wiesbrock 2011, p. 50).
− Any immigrant (older than 16 with a low or non command of
Swedish) can attend SFI - Swedish courses for immigrants (free
of charge).

8. Adult immigrants in the learing process and their
motivation
− Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation.
− Wlodkowski (2008) believes that knowing motivation of adult
learners helps us to understand how to educate them and to help
them to achieve a better academic performance.

9. A STUDY OF THE MOTIVATION
 The study conducted in free language courses in the Czech Republic
and Sweden in 2012.
 The research question was as followed:
 Are there any differences in the motives of participants to attend
language education in the Czech Republic and Sweden?
 The respondents were chosen randomly.
 In the end, the questions were distributed to 227 respondents in
Sweden and 102 respondents in the Czech Republic.
 Full data was obtained from 222 respondents in Swedish
classes, from 95 respondents in Czech classes.

10. − Method of data collection – a non-standardized questionnaire,
different language versions:
− CZ – Czech, Czech and English language version, Russian,
Ukrainian, and Vietnamese;
− SWE – Swedish and English.

11. The data analysis

12. Number of respondents
in Czech Republic
Number of respondents
in Sweden

13. The hypotheses were…
 H0 : There is not a statistically significant difference among the
motives for participation in language learning among students in the
Czech Republic and Sweden.
 HA: There is a statistically significant difference among the motives for
participation in language learning among students in the Czech
Republic and Sweden.
 The respondents could tick more possibilities: I want to do something
in my spare time. / I want to meet new people. / I want to meet with
old friends. / I want to learn something new. / I attend the course
because of my family. / I want to be able to participate better in
everyday situations. / Another reason, please write which one ...

14. Results

15. Results
 To analyze the collected data the chi-square independence for
the PivotTable was used.
 According to our calculations, the value test criterion χ² = 22,685
was higher than the value of the test criterion for a given degree
of freedom χ² 0.05 (5) = 11.070 , which led to the fact that we
rejected the null hypothesis and accept the alternative
hypothesis:
 There is a statistically significant difference among the motives
for participation in language learning among students in the
Czech Republic and Sweden.

16.  To interpret the obtained result, a z-score test was used.
 On the basis of the z-score results the followings statements were
formulated:
 1) The motive “to communicate in everyday situations“ appeared more than
expected in case of the Swedish respondents, and thus it was stronger in
comparison with the Czech respondents.
 2) Since the Czech respondents selected the motivation “I want to learn
something new“ more, it may reflect the stronger intrinsic motivation in case
of Czech participants in comparison to the Swedish ones.
 3) The other motives were statistically insignificant in both groups of
respondents.

17. Conclusion
− clear differences between the respondents in the two countries.
− Immigrants in the Czech Republic show an intrinsic desire to
learn, at the same time as their counterparts in Sweden lean
rather towards extrinsic motivation.
− In case of other possible motivations, there was no real difference
between the two countries.

18.  Another consequence of the results is that there might not be any
need to put so much emphasis on integration language exams,
but rather that it is more important to promote other forms of
study.
 For example – offering more evening courses within non-formal
education for those who have a job.
 Possible ideas how to improve motivation of immigrants to
learn the target language:
 Sweden needs to focus more on creating space for immigrants
and Swedes to meet on a regular basis. The Czech Republic
might also focus less on the formal exams, since these anyway
appear to bear little importance for the motivation to learn.

19. Thank you!