The purpose of this study is two-fold: (1) to find context-specific motivational factors in Korean college contexts within the framework of Gardner’s integrativeness and Dörnyei’s (2005, 2009) L2 Motivational Self System; (2) to examine how those motivational factors explain motivated behavior. For this purpose, motivation data by 787 students was analyzed. The factor analysis revealed eight factors in Korean context: promotional instrumentality, bad learning experience, ought-to L2 self, integrativeness, elusive ideal L2 self, ethnocentrism, intercultural avoidance, and international posture. The regression analysis showed that four motivational factors, bad learning experience, ought-to L2 self, elusive ideal L2 self, and promotional instrumentality, significantly explained the participants’ motivated behavior. The findings indicate that there existed context-specific motivational factors which could better explain success of L2 in Korean EFL college contexts. The theoretical and pedagogical implications were provided at the conclusion.

Due to the increase in international trade, mass transportation, and information technology, the role of English as a global language has changed, and conventional EFL/ESL motivation needs paradigmatic reconstruction. This study compares Dörnyei’s (2009) recent proposal of a second language (L2) motivat-ional self-system with Gardner’s (1985) socio-educational model by investigating 2,832 Korean students’ English learning motivation from Grades 3 through 12 in 14 different schools. The cross-grade survey results indicated that Korean EFL learners’ motivational intensity showed a curvilinear pattern, which means their motivation consistently decreased until Grade 9 but increased from Grades 10 to 12. A series of regression analyses showed that Dörnyei’s L2 motivational self-system was a better predictor than Gardner’s socio-educational model in terms of the explanatory power for students’ English proficiency; students’ ideal L2 and ought-to L2 selves explained better than integrativeness and two types of instrumentality (i.e., promotion- and prevention-based). This confirms the findings of recent literature conducted in different nations. Also, the study provides empirical evidence that the ought-to L2 self, which is an external, social form of L2 motivation, functions only at the cognitive level, whereas the ideal L2 self, a more internalized form, taps into both the cognitive and affective levels.