University learners of Italian in two surveys report ideal-self motivation rather than instrumental motivation; a contrast with their teachers' view is reported but not confirmed in the text read.¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 2 studies · 1 associational r?, 1 qualitative r? · q2
Currency · newest study 2026 · 1 of 2 entries checked against their sources (automated) · not reviewed by a person

Stated for Italian specifically. For many second languages — English above all — instrumental motivation dominates, so design advice transferred from those contexts points the wrong way here.

Subclaims¶

q2 i? A survey of 211 US university learners of Italian, analysed through Dörnyei's L2 Motivational Self System, found a dominant ideal self; a small number of responses also suggested a possible multilingual self — learners placing Italian inside a broader plural identity rather than treating it as a discrete skill. → Ferronato 2026

q2 i? Australian university learners "did not make much reference to instrumental motivation factors, as opposed to their teachers, who mentioned more examples of industries where Italian is in high demand." → D'Orazzi & Hajek 2022

q2 i? Motivation operated at three levels — micro psychological, meso pedagogical, macro social — and changed over the first year of study rather than holding fixed. → D'Orazzi & Hajek 2022

Evidence¶

Ferronato 2026¶

Ferronato, M. (2026). Motivation, L2 Selves, and Experience of University Students of Italian in the United States. Journal for the Psychology of Language Learning, 8(2), 1–31. doi:10.52598/jpll/8/2/1

q2 · cross-sectional self-report survey analysed against an established motivational framework · i? · a composition of motives, not an effect size · n=211 · qualitative · r?

211 university learners of Italian in the United States were surveyed and their responses analysed through the L2 Motivational Self System. The ideal L2 self dominated. A small number of responses suggested the possible emergence of a multilingual self (Henry, 2017; Ushioda, 2017); the author says these responses may not be sufficient for stronger claims and that the instrument would need adjusting to investigate it properly.

D'Orazzi & Hajek 2022¶

D'Orazzi, G., & Hajek, J. (2022). A Multidimensional Understanding of Italian L2 Learner Motivation among University Students in a Predominantly English-Speaking Environment. Italica, 99(3), 350–375. doi:10.5406/23256672.99.3.04

q2 · quantitative survey: two online questionnaires, 51 Likert items, over one year (abstract only) · i? · no effect size in the abstract · n=not reported in the abstract · associational · r?

Beginner students of Italian at a selection of Australian universities answered two online questionnaires of 51 Likert items about their first year of study. The study analyses motivation at three levels (micro psychological and cognitive, meso pedagogical, macro social) and reports that it is multidimensional and changes over time. The abstract describes the study as strongly quantitative and as building on, and possibly contrasting with, the authors' earlier qualitative study; it does not mention teachers, so the learner–teacher contrast quoted in the subclaim above could not be checked against the text available here and may belong to that earlier study.

Discussion¶

Framing Italian practice as professionally useful addresses a motive the audience does not report having. That is worth stating plainly because it inverts the default: instrumental framing is the safe choice for most second languages and is the wrong choice here.

A motivational framing chosen at launch is unlikely to hold. Because motivation changed across a learner's course in the Australian study, the design question is not which motive to appeal to but how to notice when it has moved.

Two studies, one finding, and that is the whole of the support. They agree, which is why they are on one page, but agreement between two surveys of a similar population is weaker than it looks: both are university learners in predominantly English-speaking countries, self-reporting. Neither covers school-age learners, adults outside formal study, heritage learners, or learners resident in Italy — for whom instrumental motivation is plainly present. Splitting this into one claim per source would be reasonable if a third study disagreed.

The teacher half of the title rests on one quotation that could not be checked here. D'Orazzi & Hajek (2022) is recorded from its abstract, which describes a student questionnaire study and mentions no teachers. The quoted contrast with teachers may come from the article's discussion of the authors' earlier qualitative study. Until the article's text is read, treat "their teachers assume the reverse" as unconfirmed; the learner half is supported by Ferronato (2026) as well.

Related Claims¶

• In the L2MSS, the L2 learning experience predicts intended effort most strongly, while the ideal L2 self is weaker than the theory argues — the general claim this finding bears on, with the studies behind it

• Goal setting improves performance — what to do with a motive once identified, rather than which motive to expect

• Language learning strategy use correlates with L2 proficiency in adolescents — the other learner-side variable from this set, and the one that is actionable rather than descriptive
• Preserving a bilingual student's heritage language supports rather than hinders English acquisition — identity and language as reinforcing rather than competing
• Teaching students in a language they understand benefits both language learning and broader learning — related
• The Cognitive Model does not address the social aspect of L2 writing and assumes uniform cognitive processes — related
• Learners invest more effort in tasks they perceive as interesting, personally important, or useful to their future goals. — related
• Meaningful L2 learning is achieved through a conducive environment and authentic tasks and materials — related
• Integrative motivation sustains long-term language-learning motivation better than instrumental motivation — related
• Ideal L2 self positively and significantly predicts student self-efficacy, generalizing prior qualitative findings quantitatively — related
• Criterion measures, attitudes towards learning English, instrumentality promotion, and ideal L2 self are the strongest predictors of L2 self-efficacy — related
• Only about a third of K‑5 writing‑motivation studies explicitly referred to motivation theory to justify the design or choice of their motivation measure — related