J. Taylorson Take Away Paper Finished Version
-
Upload
jennifer-taylorson -
Category
Documents
-
view
219 -
download
0
Transcript of J. Taylorson Take Away Paper Finished Version
-
8/3/2019 J. Taylorson Take Away Paper Finished Version
1/23
Take Away Paper
Jennifer Taylorson
1
Language learners are responsible for their own learning and should develop their
own strategies; it is not the teachers responsibility, nor is it feasible, given the many
ways in which learners differ. To what extent do you agree with this statement?
Discuss with reference to SLA theory.
Take Away Paper
Jennifer E. Taylorson
University of St. Andrews
Student number: 110017069
-
8/3/2019 J. Taylorson Take Away Paper Finished Version
2/23
Take Away Paper
Jennifer Taylorson
2
Table of Contents
Introduction ................................................................................................................ 3
Part 1 ......................................................................................................................... 3
Part 2 ......................................................................................................................... 6
What are Strategies? ......................................................................................................... 6
What qualities are to be found in a good language learner and what strategies do such
learners tend to use? ......................................................................................................... 8
How can learners differ? .................................................................................................... 9
Age ................................................................................................................................ 9
Aptitude ........................................................................................................................ 10
Motivation .................................................................................................................... 11
Intelligence ................................................................................................................... 12
Personality ................................................................................................................... 13
Learner Beliefs ............................................................................................................. 13
Learning Styles ............................................................................................................ 14
What does research into the teaching of language learning strategies tell us? ................ 15
Do the above differences make teaching strategies impracticable? ..................... ............ 17
Conclusion ............................................................................................................... 19
Bibliography ............................................................................................................. 21
Appendix 1 ............................................................................................................... 23
-
8/3/2019 J. Taylorson Take Away Paper Finished Version
3/23
Take Away Paper
Jennifer Taylorson
3
Introduction
In order to answer this question satisfactorily, it must be broken into two parts.
The first part, Language learners are responsible for their own learning and should
develop their own strategies, requires consideration of the roles and responsibilities
of both the teacher and learner, and consideration also of the nature of the learning
process. The second part, regarding the feasibility of teaching language learning
strategies, requires us to reflect upon what factors may make strategy training
challenging, what research into the teaching of language learning strategies can
reveal, and finally how these challenges may practically be overcome.
Part 1
Key Questions:
y Is it the responsibility of the learner to develop his or her own strategies?
y
H
ow does learning occur?
y What is the role of the teacher?
y What is the role of the learner?
Traditionally, L2 acquisition was considered to be a process of habit formation.
In this view, teachers were seen to be transmitters of knowledge, and the students,
merely passive vessels to be filled up with information which would take root
through the process of memorizing, copying, and repeating the expert knower.
Teachers were seen to be central to the learning process.
As stated by Mitchell & Myles (2004), Chomskys 1957 review of Skinner's
Verbal Behavior (1957) introduced a radically new idea; the idea that language
acquisition was based on an innate genetic blueprint that provided a natural
-
8/3/2019 J. Taylorson Take Away Paper Finished Version
4/23
Take Away Paper
Jennifer Taylorson
4
readiness for language acquisition. For acquisition to occur, learners had to
internally process the language data in their environments and hypothesise about
the rules of the language. This radical departure from the behaviourist view of
learning shifted our view of teacher and learner, and brought about the idea that
learners are not only active agents in the learning process, but in fact central to it.
As time has progressed the idea that learners are central to the learning
process holds true, and research into second language acquisition strongly
indicates that learner motivation, autonomy, and activeness are central pillars of
success. Indeed, as stated in Cotterall (1995), learners able to self-monitor their
own output and the output of others, who are intrinsically motivated, actively seek
out opportunities to communicate and practice language, set manageable and
achievable goals for themselves, and are aware of what they need to do in order to
improve tend to be more successful language learners than students who do not
exhibit these behaviours.
Whilst it may be a commonly held belief that language learning success
depends very much upon learners taking responsibility for their own development,
research tells us that not all learners will naturally or independently develop the
strategies that they will need in order to achieve this independence. If, as evidence
suggests, it would help such learners to develop autonomy and independence then
it would seem logical to suggest that a goal of language educationalists should be to
facilitate this development. To suggest that it should be the sole responsibility of the
learner to develop his or her own learning strategies may be to block the path of
development for that individual.
From a sociocultural perspective, the human mind is mediated, and social
and mental activity is constructed through interaction with more knowledge
-
8/3/2019 J. Taylorson Take Away Paper Finished Version
5/23
Take Away Paper
Jennifer Taylorson
5
members of a society (Lantolf, 2007). In this view of learning, it is not our role as
teachers merely to generically transmit content knowledge, leaving the learner
entirely responsible for processing and applying this information; rather it is our role
to provide the scaffolding learners need to transition from inter-psychological to
intra-psychological functioning (Mara C. M. de Guerrero and Olga S. Villamil,
2000), which will eventually lead to learner independence and autonomy.
As Lantolf (2007) states, interaction between learner and teacher leads to the
development of higher mental capacities such as intentional memory, voluntary
attention, planning, logical thought and problem solving, learning, and evaluating the
effectiveness of these processes. Cummings distinction between basic
interpersonal skills (BICS) and cognitive academic language proficiency (CALP)
stresses the specific relevance these mental capacities have to the language
learning process, and emphasise the fact that for success in certain language tasks
the development of such thinking skills is essential. On cross referencing these
higher order thinking skills against Oxfords strategy taxonomy, 1985 (cited in
Erhman & Oxford, 1990), their relevance is further highlighted as one finds that
these mental capacities are the essential basis for many metacognitive, cognitive,
and memory strategies.
In terms of the practical application of the sociocultural theory of learning to
strategy training, three models have been devised. These (as cited in Chamot
2004) are, the Styles and Strategies-Based Instruction Model (Cohen, 1998), the
Cognitive Academic Language Learning Approach Model (Chamot, 2005; Chamot
et al., 1999) and Grenfell & Harriss 1999 model. Each of these models seek to find
a structure through which the teacher can locate each individual learners zone of
proximal development and provide relevant and specific scaffolded support that will
help learners develop language learning strategies appropriate to their individual
-
8/3/2019 J. Taylorson Take Away Paper Finished Version
6/23
Take Away Paper
Jennifer Taylorson
6
needs and to the tasks they must perform. (Please see appendix 1 for a table
adapted from Harris, 2003 (found in Chamot, 2004) outlining these three Models for
Language Learning Strategy Instruction).
Part 2
What are Strategies?
As defined by Chamot (2005), Learning strategies are procedures that
facilitate a learning task. Strategies are most often conscious and goal-driven,
especially in the beginning stages of tackling an unfamiliar language task.
To further investigate what language learning strategies are, we may use
Oxfords Strategy Taxonomy, 1985 (cited in Erhman & Oxford, 1990) in which
language learning strategies are broken down into two basic categories; direct, and
indirect strategies. These two core categories are then further broken down as
follows:
Direct strategies: behaviours involving direct use of the language;
1. Memory strategies: for entering information into memory and retrieving:
a) creating mental linkages: grouping, associating/elaborating, placing new words
into a context
b) Applying images and sounds: using imagery, semantic mapping, using
keywords, representing sounds in memory
c) Reviewing well: structured reviewing
d) Employing action: using physical response or sensation, using mechanical
techniques
2. Cognitive strategies: for manipulating the language for reception and
production of meaning
-
8/3/2019 J. Taylorson Take Away Paper Finished Version
7/23
Take Away Paper
Jennifer Taylorson
7
a) Practicing: repeating, formally practicing with sounds and writing systems,
recognizing and using formulas and patterns, recombining, practicing
naturalistically
b) Receiving and sending messages: getting the idea quickly, using resources for
receiving and sending messages
c) Analysing and Reasoning: reasoning deductively, analysing expressions,
analysing contrastively (across languages), translating, transferring
d) Creating structure for input and output: taking notes, summarizing, highlighting
3. Compensation strategies: for overcoming limitations in existing knowledge
a) Guessing intelligently: using linguistic clues, using other clues
b) Overcoming limitations in speaking and writing: switching to the mother
tongue, getting help, using mime or gesture, avoiding communication partially
or totally, selecting the topic, adjusting or approximating the message, coining
words, using a circumlocution or synonym
Indirect strategies: behaviours which support language learning although they do
not directly involve using the language;
1. Metacognitive strategies: for organizing and evaluating learning
a) Centring your learning: overviewing and linking with already known material,
paying attention, delaying speech production to focus on listening
b) Arranging and planning your learning: finding out about language learning,
organizing, setting goals and objectives, identifying the purpose of a language
task (purposeful listening/ reading/ speaking/ writing), planning for a language
task, seeking practice opportunities
c) Evaluating your learning: self-monitoring, self-evaluating
-
8/3/2019 J. Taylorson Take Away Paper Finished Version
8/23
Take Away Paper
Jennifer Taylorson
8
2. Affective strategies: for managing emotions and attitudes
a) Lowering your anxiety: using progressive relaxation, deep breathing, or
mediation, using music, using laughter
b) Encouraging yourself: making positive statements, taking risks wisely,
rewarding yourself
c) Taking your emotional temperature: listening to your body, using a checklist,
writing a language learning diary, discussing your feelings with someone else
3. Social strategies: for learning with others
a) Asking questions: asking for clarification or verification, asking for correction
b) Cooperating with others: cooperating with others, cooperating with proficient
users of the new language
c) Empathizing with others: developing cultural understanding, becoming aware
of others' thoughts and feelings
What qualities are to be found in a good language learner and what strategies do
such learners tend to use?
According to Rubin (1975) the good language learner is a willing and accurate
guesser who actively uses available contextual clues in order to inductively infer
meanings, which according to Oxfords strategy taxonomy can be termed as a
direct, compensatory strategy. He is also highly motivated to communicate, has
good interpersonal skills, and possesses the ability to use whatever resources are at
his disposal in order to communicate the message (which may translate into
application or preference for direct compensatory strategies). The good language
learner is not inhibited and does not feel foolish when communicating indirect
affective strategies possibly, but certainly social strategies. He pays attention to
form and seeks opportunities to test hypothesis, taking every opportunity to try out
new language, and taking full advantage of communication opportunities (indirect
-
8/3/2019 J. Taylorson Take Away Paper Finished Version
9/23
Take Away Paper
Jennifer Taylorson
9
metacognitive and social strategies). Finally, the good language learner monitors
his own and the speech of others in terms of form, which is an indirect
metacognitive strategy, and also closely attends to meaning.
How can learners differ?
If the behaviours exhibited and strategies chosen by successful language
learners can be identified, then logically one might assume that less successful
language learners may be assisted through training that helps them to implement
strategies utilized by more successful language learners. Whilst this may potentially
be the case, research into the effects of learner differences on the strategies
learners choose to implement suggests that there is no one type of successful
language learner. Rather, the success of an implemented strategy, and of the
general success of the individual learner, depends on a complex interaction
between context, background, age, motivation and attitude, personality, and
learning style.
In the following sections we will take a brief look at how learners can differ and
what impact these differences can have on language learning strategies.
Age
In terms of a persons age, it is argued that there is a critical period for
language acquisition during early childhood and that if one begins learning a
language after this period then the learning will not be constrained by UG in the
same way in which the learning of the L1 is suggested to be. Language learning
after the passing of the critical period is said to be typified by incomplete success
due to the fact the learners can no longer rely on their natural readiness for
language acquisition. Therefore, although adult learners may have to rely on more
general learning abilities for L2 acquisition, such as Oxfords metacognitive,
-
8/3/2019 J. Taylorson Take Away Paper Finished Version
10/23
Take Away Paper
Jennifer Taylorson
10
cognitive, and memory strategies, their knowledge of the world and of learning can
work to their advantage as they can use this knowledge as a useful language
learning resource. In terms of this difference affecting the teachability of strategies,
as a class will usually be made up of learners of the same age (roughly) this
difference does not pose a huge problem to the teacher.
Aptitude
Aptitude, as defined by Carroll, 1991 (cited in Lightbown and Spada, 2006) is
characterized by the ability to learn quickly. It can be broken down into four parts
in which a persons natural capacity for language learning can be measured in terms
of their phonemic coding ability, associative memory, grammatical sensitivity, and
their inductive language learning ability Carroll, 1965 (cited in Skehan 1991).
As Skehan (1991) states, aptitude is one factor that affects learning style and
also the strategies a learner may choose to utilize. Indeed, Skehan, 1986a (cited in
Skehan, 1991) was able to find evidence for the existence of different learner
profiles according to their language aptitude as calculated by a language aptitude
test. For example, learners who scored highly on inductive language learning
ability saw language learning as a pattern-making game. For these learners rule
analysis was a fundamental tenet of language learning. Other learners, however,
relied more heavily on memory and accumulated a number of pre-fabricated chunks
which enabled communication to occur more quickly than with the analytically
minded students.
In terms of how aptitude can affect strategy choice, learners who are more
analytical will logically favour cognitive strategies such as analysing and reasoning,
whereas students relying more heavily on memory will probably favour memory
strategies such as creating mental linkages, applying images and sounds, and
-
8/3/2019 J. Taylorson Take Away Paper Finished Version
11/23
Take Away Paper
Jennifer Taylorson
11
reviewing chunks and vocabulary well. Interestingly, Skehan implies that it is not
necessary for a language learner to employ a huge range of different strategies;
rather he states that success seemed to occur when learners played to their
strengths. Indeed, Wesche, 1981 (cited in Skehan, 1991) indicates that matching
students with methodologies on the basis of their aptitude profile may lead to
greater student satisfaction and success, suggesting that forcing students to adopt
strategies that they are not naturally comfortable with may hinder progress.
Motivation
Motivation is perhaps one of the most important factors to affect the success of
language learning. Perhaps the most well know description of motivation is
Gardners 1979 & 1985 (cited in Skehan 1991) integrative and instrumental
motivation. According to Gardner, a person who possesses integrative motivation
typically has a positive attitude towards the target language community, identifies with
them, and approaches language study with the intention of entering that community.
An instrumentally motivated person on the other hand sees language learning as
enabling them to do useful things, but as having no special significance in itself. In
general terms, motivation is thought to be of extreme importance in being able to
successful learn a language, however, integrative motivation is believed to be the
more powerful of the two, as it comes from within the individual.
The link between how motivation may affect strategy choice is not clear,
however, it may be that learners who are invested in the target language community
may implement more social strategies than those who have little interest in the
language or culture itself.
-
8/3/2019 J. Taylorson Take Away Paper Finished Version
12/23
Take Away Paper
Jennifer Taylorson
12
Intelligence
Intelligence, as stated by Lightbown and Spada (2006), is more closely
related to metalinguistic knowledge rather than communicative ability. Furthermore,
traditionally, intelligence was seen only to pertain to the academic skills of reading,
writing and vocabulary (Genesee 1976, cited in Lightbown and Spada 2006). The
work of Howard Gardner, however, changed this very one dimensional view of
intelligence as he posited that in fact there are 7 types of intelligences.
These multiple-intelligences include logical-mathematical intelligence; linguistic
intelligence; spatial intelligence; musical intelligence; bodily-kinaesthetic intelligence;
interpersonal intelligence; and finally, intrapersonal intelligence. More recently, the
above seven types of intelligence have been added to, and now include naturalistic
intelligence and existential intelligence bring the total number of intelligences to nine.
Again, the exact correlation between intelligence and strategy choice remains
unclear. However, Arnold and Fonsec (2004) state that different multiple intelligence
types do in fact affect the way in which learners learn languages. For example, they
state that logical-mathematical learners, who are good at problem-solving tasks, in
language learning, focus mainly on meaning. Through constant rereading of the text
to solve the problem of meaning, they acquire a familiarity with the vocabulary and
structures used. These behaviours perhaps suggest that these types of learners may
choose to implement strategies such as cognitive, and some compensatory
strategies. One more example of how intelligence type can affect choice is the way
in which interpersonal learners behave. These learners, as stated by Arnold and
Fonsec (2004) have a strong ability to understand other people, to work cooperatively
and to communicate effectively. Their desire to communicate and work with others
strongly suggests that they prefer to learner through the adoption of social strategies.
-
8/3/2019 J. Taylorson Take Away Paper Finished Version
13/23
Take Away Paper
Jennifer Taylorson
13
Personality
As stated by Lightbown and Spada (2006) there are a number of different
personality traits that may affect second language learning including extroversion,
inhibition, anxiety, self-esteem, dominance, talkativeness, and responsiveness.
However as Lightbown and Spada go on to say in general, the available research
does not show a single clearly defined relationship between personality traits and
second language acquisition. For example, whilst extroversion has traditionally been
linked to the adoption of positive social strategies and success in language learning,
Wong-Fillmore, 1979 (cited in Lightbown and Spada 2006) found that in certain
circumstances introverted, quiet observant types had greater success. Such
anomalies highlight the complex effect that context, culture, background, beliefs,
aptitude and intelligence have on the behaviours a learner exhibits, the choice of
strategies a learner implements, and ultimately, the overall success of that individual.
Clearly, much more research needs to be conducted to determine the nature of the
relationship between the above elements.
Learner Beliefs
Most learners will have strong beliefs about the way they think they should be
taught, what they should be taught, and the way they think they learn best. These
beliefs are usually based on their previous learning experiences.
As stated by Cotterall (1995), all behaviour is governed by beliefs and
experiences, therefore learner beliefs can have a strong impact on the adoption of
successful language learning strategies. For example, as Cotterall (1995) states, if a
learner believes that error will impede his language learning progress then he may be
discouraged from participating in fluency-focused activities or communicating with
other learners or native speakers of the language because of anxiety or fear of
getting it wrong. Logically, such a student would perhaps not ordinarily choose to
-
8/3/2019 J. Taylorson Take Away Paper Finished Version
14/23
Take Away Paper
Jennifer Taylorson
14
implement compensation or social strategies as these often involve risk taking which
would potentially create further anxiety.
Learning Styles
There are various different models that can be used to describe a
students learning style. The following, however, detail only two of these and refer
specifically to the learners preferred way of processing information. The first is
Myers-Briggs adaptation of Carl Jungs learning-styles model (cited in Oxford, 1990)
which includes four pairs of opposite processing styles. These, as described in
Oxford (1990) are:
1. Judger: hardworking and self-disciplined
2. Perceiver: can deal with uncertainty and likes less structure
3. Extraverts: friendly and sociable
4. Introverts: self-sufficient and reserved
5. Intuitives: down-to-earth and realistic
6. Intuitives: imaginative and holistic-thinkers
7. Thinkers: logical and analytic
8. Feelers: interpersonally oriented and empathic
Another way in which to look at learning styles is to use Honey and
Mumfords learning styles model which categorizes people into activists,
pragmatists, theorists, and reflectors.
We can also refer to a students VAK (visual, auditory, kinaesthetic)
learning style. This, however, refers largely to the learners preferred way of
receiving the input they will later come to process, rather than the learners
information processing preference.
-
8/3/2019 J. Taylorson Take Away Paper Finished Version
15/23
Take Away Paper
Jennifer Taylorson
15
Research carried out by Ehrman and Oxford (1990) looked into the link
between Myers-Briggs learner types and strategy choice. Their research strongly
suggests that learning style has a marked impact on strategy choice. For example,
they found that Extroverts use social strategies consistently and easily, whereas
Introverts reject such strategies but prefer to implement metacognitive alternatives.
Sensing students apparently reported a strong liking for memory strategies, reported
frequent use of cognitive and metacognitive strategies, but rejected compensation
strategies. Intuitives, on the other hand, made extensive use of compensation
strategies. Thinkers and Feelers were completely juxtaposed. As suggested by the
researchers perhaps because of their enjoyment of analysis, Thinkers showed an
extremely strong preference for cognitive strategies whereas Feelers completely
rejected most cognitive strategies, especially analysis. Finally, Judgers indicated
preference for metacognitive strategies like "tactical" planning whereas Perceivers
typically rejected this. Judgers, being uncomfortable with ambiguity, strongly rejected
compensation strategies, unlike Perceivers who preferred such strategies.
What does research into the teaching of language learning strategies tell us?
First of all, it is worth defining what strategy training in fact is. Ellis &
Sinclair, 1989 (cited in Chen, 2007) define it as the explicit teaching of how, when,
and why students should employ FL learning strategies to enhance their efforts at
reaching language programme goals.
In terms of the usefulness of strategy training, despite the many learner
differences we have just discussed above, Erhman & Oxford (1990) state that,
Important effects of training in the use of learning strategies have been discovered
by a number of researchers. Some specific examples of this work include Ross and
Rost (1991), Thompson & Rubin (1996), Carrier (2003), Ozeki (2000), Vandergrift
-
8/3/2019 J. Taylorson Take Away Paper Finished Version
16/23
Take Away Paper
Jennifer Taylorson
16
(2003b) (all cited in Chamot 2005) who studied the efficacy of teaching learning
strategies to improve the outcome of listening tasks, and whose research was carried
out in a range of different contexts. All of the above mentioned researchers found
that the teaching of strategies had a positive impact on the learners ability to
complete the listening tasks in the study. Other examples of research that shows
strategy training may have a positive effect on learner progress include Grenfell &
Harris 1999 study (cited in Chamot 2005) which focused on the teaching of
vocabulary memorization strategies, and Macaros 2001 study (cited in Chamot 2005)
which focused on teaching six form learners of French metacognitive strategies to
improve writing skills. As Chamot (2005) states, perhaps the most challenging area
for teaching strategy instruction is in oral communication due to the fact that the use
of deliberate strategies can restrict the flow of natural speech. Due to this
presentational speaking, rather than interactive speaking, has been the focus of
several studies (see Cohen, 1998; OMalley & Chamot, 1990, cited in Chamot 2005)
and found that strategy training did indeed have a positive impact on the task
outcome.
Whilst much of the research suggests that strategy training is often
beneficial to learners, as Rees-Millar (1993) states, we must be careful of assuming
that strategies utilized by good language learners will be beneficial to all learners. To
qualify this, she cites several studies which appear to suggest that even when
unsuccessful language learners are taught to adopt, or independently adopt,
strategies used by good language learners, they dont necessarily become more
successful. For example, Vann & Abraham 1990 (cited in Rees-Miller, 1993) carried
out a study in which they sought to identify the strategies two unsuccessful language
learners were utilizing. Interestingly, despite the learners lack of success they were
found to be employing an extensive repertoire of strategies characteristic of
-
8/3/2019 J. Taylorson Take Away Paper Finished Version
17/23
Take Away Paper
Jennifer Taylorson
17
successful learners, such as engagement in the task, risk taking, monitoring errors,
and paying attention to overall meaning.
Another study Rees-Miller reports on is that of Porte (1988) who studied 15
unsuccessful students of EFL. Porte found that the students used many learning
strategies that were considered good, however, the sophistication and appropriateness of
the application of these strategies to specific tasks appeared to be lacking when compared
to more successful classmates.
Do the above differences make teaching strategies impracticable?
As we can see from the above discussion, learners vary greatly from one
another, and these variations necessarily affect the choice of strategies each learner
will implement. However, whilst this is certainly true, the available research tells us
that strategy instruction is feasible and can be beneficial to learners. Whether
learner differences make the teaching of language learning strategies impracticable
is perhaps down to the approach taken by each individual teacher. For example, a
teacher who takes a prescriptive approach to strategy instruction and seeks to
impose his favoured strategies on learners will necessarily fail as these strategies
will not necessarily be appropriate to the needs of each individual in the class.
On the other hand, a teacher who seeks to engage learners in an
interactive and self-reflective process can instead help individual learners gain
greater awareness of the strategies they may currently be using, introduce further
suggested strategies, and scaffold the learner to make appropriate choices that will
help them achieve their language learning aims. Furthermore, through the
continuous evaluation of these strategies, learners will be empowered to make
choices for themselves, thus aiding learner autonomy.
-
8/3/2019 J. Taylorson Take Away Paper Finished Version
18/23
Take Away Paper
Jennifer Taylorson
18
Sensitivity to a teaching context is also an important factor that can affect the
potential success of strategy instruction as the way in which strategies may be
taught, and the types of strategies taught will depend, for example, upon the level of
a class, the age of learners in a class, whether the class is ESL or EFL, the goals of
the learners in a class (exam focused, writing focused, communication focused,
general English class), or whether a class is monolingual or mixed. For example,
whilst teaching a monolingual class a teacher may use the learners L1 to explicitly
clarify the reasons why a particular strategy may be useful. However, if teaching a
mixed lower level class then the teacher will have to rely more heavily on
demonstration techniques, and the reasons why the strategy is useful to the
learners may not be explicitly communicated. To provide an example of how
strategy type may be affected by the goals of the learners we may consider the
difference between an exam class and an academic writing class. In the former, a
teacher will probably be more focused on helping the learners pass the exam they
will come to sit. To do this, the teacher may encourage memorisation techniques or
affective strategies that will be of use in the exam. In the academic writing class,
however, the teacher will probably be more focused on sharing strategies such as
proof-reading, drafting, re-drafting and, self-assessment.
As briefly mentioned above, the explicitness of the instruction is another
consideration as is whether strategy instruction should be integrated into language
lessons or be delivered as a separate course. In terms of explicitness of instruction,
as Chamot (2005) states, there is overwhelming agreement that explicit instruction
is more effective than implicit instruction. Regarding whether strategy training
should be integrated, or be taught in a separate course outside of the language
classroom there is far more diversity of opinion, however. Gu, 1996 (cited in
Chamot, 2005) argues that strategies taught in a language class are less likely to
-
8/3/2019 J. Taylorson Take Away Paper Finished Version
19/23
Take Away Paper
Jennifer Taylorson
19
transfer to other tasks and that it may not be practical to prepare all language
teachers to teach strategies. On the other hand, as stated by Wenden, 1987b
(cited in OMalley & Chamot, 1990, p. 152) those who favour integrated strategy
training argue that learning in context is far more effective than learning separate
skills whose immediate applicability may not be evident to the learner.
Conclusion
In summary, regarding the question of whether or not it is the learners
responsibility to develop his or her own learning strategies, it can be concluded that
whilst some learners will naturally and independently adopt language learning
strategies that will aid their development, not all learners will be able to achieve this
without teacher guidance. As it is a teachers duty as the more knowledgeable
other to facilitate his learners development, we cannot state that it should be the
sole responsibility of the learner to develop his or her own learning strategies; rather
strategy development should be the culmination of efforts made both by the teacher
and the learner.
Regarding the question of feasibility, the available research suggests that the
teaching of language learning strategies in some contexts and circumstances is
possible and indeed useful to learners. However, it is important to bear in mind that
strategies for the skills of reading, writing, vocabulary learning, and oral presentations
are perhaps easier to teach and have a greater impact on task outcome than
strategies for the skills of speaking.
Further to the above, research tells us that good language learners are skilled
at matching strategies to the task they were working on, whereas less successful
language learners apparently do not have the metacognitive knowledge about task
requirements needed to select appropriate strategies (Chamot 2005). It is therefore
-
8/3/2019 J. Taylorson Take Away Paper Finished Version
20/23
Take Away Paper
Jennifer Taylorson
20
equally important, or possibly more important, for teachers to support learners to
consider the requirements of a given task in order that they may learn to decide
which strategy or strategies might be most appropriately applied to that specific
context.
Finally, in order to facilitate the development of their students effectively,
teachers must be acutely aware that the relationship between IQ, intelligence,
aptitude, age, learner beliefs, motivation, personality, learning style and strategy
choice is an extremely complex one. Furthermore, teachers must be aware that the
language learning strategies that breed success in one culture or context cannot be
applied universally to all, and that even students from within the same culture or
learning context can differ greatly and will not benefit from a one size fits all
approach to strategy teaching. This may practically be achieved through the
adoption of one of the above mentioned strategy training models (please see
appendix 1).
To conclude, as Rubin (1975) states, in the end we are only able to guide our
learners to select for themselves strategies that are appropriate to their own
individual learning styles.
-
8/3/2019 J. Taylorson Take Away Paper Finished Version
21/23
Take Away Paper
Jennifer Taylorson
21
Bibliography
Arnold, J., & Fonseca, C. (2004). Multiple Intelligence Theory and Foreign Language
Learning: A Brain-based Perspective. International Journal of English Studies,4
(1), 119-136.
Chamot, A. (2004). Issues in Language Learning Strategy Research and Teaching.
Electronic Journal of Foreign Language Teaching, 1 (1), 14-26.
Chamot, A. (2005). Language Learning Strategy Instruction: Current Issues and
Rearch. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 25, 112130.
Chen, Y. (2007). Learning to learn: the impact of strategy training. ELT Journal, 61
(1), 20-29.
Cotterall, S. (1995). Readiness for Autonomy: Investigating Learner Beliefs. System,
23 (2), 195-205. 1995
Cummings, J. (n.d.). BICS & CALP. Retrieved from
http://scholar.googleusercontent.com/scholar?q=cache:morJDf3Y9w4J:scholar.
google.com/+cummings+bics+and+calp&hl=en&as_sdt=0,5
Ehrman, M., & Oxford, R. (1990). Adult Language Learning Styles and Strategies in
an Intensive Training Setting. The Modern Language Journal, 74 (3), 311-327.
De Guerrero, M, C, M., & Villamil, O, S. (2000). Activating the ZPD: Mutual
Scaffolding in L2 Peer Revision. The Modern Language Journal, 84 (1), 51-68.
Lantolf, J. P. (2007). Sociocultural Theory: A Unified Approach to L2 Learning and
Teaching. In Cummins, J., Davison, C (Eds.),International handbook of English
language teaching, Volume 1 (693 701). New York: Springer Science +
Business Media LLC.
-
8/3/2019 J. Taylorson Take Away Paper Finished Version
22/23
Take Away Paper
Jennifer Taylorson
22
Lightbown, P, M., & Spada, N. (2006). How Languages are Learned. Oxford. OUP.
Mitchell, R. & Myles, F. (2004). Second Language Learning Theories. London. Hodder
Education.
OMalley, J., & Chamot, A. (1990). Learning strategies in second language acquisition.
Cambridge. CUP.
Rees-Miller, J. (1993). A Critical Appraisal of Learner Training: Theoretical Bases and
Teaching Implications. TESOL Quarterly, 27(4), 679-689.
Rubin, J. (1975). What the "Good Language Learner" Can Teach Us. TESOL Quarterly,9,
(1), 41-51.
Skehan, P. (1991). Individual Differences in Second Language Learning. SSLA, 13, 275 -
298.
-
8/3/2019 J. Taylorson Take Away Paper Finished Version
23/23
Take Away Paper
Jennifer Taylorson
23
Appendix 1
Styles and Strategies-BasedInstruction Model
Cognitive Academic LanguageLearning Approach Model
Grenfell & Harris
Teacher as diagnostician:
Helps students identifycurrent strategies andlearning styles.
Preparation:
Teacher identifies studentscurrent learning strategies forfamiliar tasks.
Awareness Raising: Students
complete a task, and thenidentify the strategies theyused.
Teacher as languagelearner:Shares own learningexperiences and thinkingprocesses.
Presentation:The teacher models, names, &explains new strategy; asksstudents if and how they haveused it.
Modelling:Teacher models, discussesvalue of new strategy, makeschecklist of strategies for lateruse.
Teacher as learner trainer:Trains students how to use
learning strategies.
Practice:Students practice new strategy;
in subsequent strategy practice,teacher fades reminders toencourage independentstrategy use.
General practice:Students practice new
strategies with different tasks.
Teacher as coordinator:Supervises students studyplans and monitorsdifficulties.
Self-evaluation:Students evaluate their ownstrategy use immediately afterpractice.
Action planning:Students set goals and choosestrategies to attain those goals.
Teacher as coach:Provides on going guidanceon students progress.
Expansion: StudentsTransfer strategies to newtasks, combine strategies intoclusters, develop repertoire ofpreferred strategies.
Focused practice:Students carry outaction plan using selectedstrategies; teacher fadesprompts so that students usestrategies automatically.
-Assessment:Teacher assesses students useof strategies and impact onperformance.
Evaluation:Teacher and students evaluatesuccess of action plan; set newgoals; cycle begins again.