The Impact of Social Support on EFL Learners’ Motivation at Iraqi Kurdistan Universities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There are many reasons standing behind the fact why non-native speakers study English as a foreign language. For some, the aspiration to be a foreign language teacher or the ability to use English at work is the main reasons and driving factors, while for others the reason is simply to pass the course requirement at schools and universities. The present study aims to evaluate student motivation level and the factors influencing motivation. This paper will also highlight the influence of the factor of social support on the other factors of motivation. Data were gathered through likert scale questionnaires distributed to EFL learners of English in two different universities in Kurdistan region of Iraq and semi-structured interviews conducted with a number of students who have been selected randomly. The results indicated that the motivation to learn English is not dominated by one factor; however, the factors of goals, intention, and outside social support appear as the most influenced factors. Also, there was a statistically significant parallel correlation between the outside social support and goals factors. Consequently, the outside social factor appears as a significant contributor to the motivation of EFL Kurdish learners.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".