GGGE6533 Sem 2 (2013/2014) Language Learning

Strategies

By Nor Dalila Ismail

#P69236

Gender

Environment

Career orientation

Learning styles Course

grades

Cultural background

Motivation

Teacher’s mediating

role

Proficiency level

Personality Age

Language exposure

(1) Teacher‟s mediating role

• The high percentage of learner‟s knowledge comes from the teacher (Marttinen, 2008).

• From sociocultural perspective: The relationship between language learning strategies

and teacher‟s mediating role (Behroozizad et al., 2012)

• Gao (2010): Theoretical basis of language learning strategies have turned to the

sociolcultural context of language learning, which proven more effective.

• The shift from learner-centered “learner-in-the-context” (Gao, 2010).

• In terms of learning, achieving “higher forms of human mental activity” requires

mediation (Lantolf, 2000).

• Findings from Gibbons (2003): In a science classroom; the impact of teacher-student

talk on learners‟ language development. The teacher‟s mediation took place via their

interaction with learners. The result of the study showed that both teachers and learners

were active constructors in language development.

• Behroozizad et al. (2012) revealed how teacher‟s mediation is highly relates to ELF learners‟ language learning strategies within a socio-cultural setting.

• In their study, it has been found that the teacher‟s scaffolding mediated the EFL learners‟ language learning strategy development. The findings on scaffolding techniques are parallel with Walqui‟s(2006) instructional scaffolding types.

• The teacher had succeeded in creating a sociocultural setting in the classroom & encouraged active participation among the learners.

• Stimulated by teacher‟s mediation, the EFL learners successfully shown that they could develop a variety of strategies to improve their knowledge in many aspects of language including speaking, vocabulary and pronunciation.

(2) P e r s o n a l i t y

t r a i t• In language strategy performance, individual differences are being stressed in

current studies (Toyoda, 1998).

• Oxford & Nyikos (1989) claimed that language learners who are successful

choose the right strategies that best suit their personalities. Brown (2001)

argued that different characterization of individuals adopt different language

learning strategies.

• “Language learners are individuals approaching language learning in their

own unique way” (Horwitz, 1999).

• Similarly, personality factors are crucial in the development of linguistic

abilities (Ellis, 1985).

(2) Personality traits

• Fazeli (2012) did a study to see the effect of personality traits on use of

cognitive English Language learning strategies. In his study, 213 Iranian

female university learners of English as Foreign Language (EFL) were

involved.

• The result of the study showed that there is a significant relationship

between the traits of personality and use of cognitive English Language

learning strategies. However, Fazeli (2012) concluded that individual

learner‟s personality traits cannot be a strong element in influencing

learner‟s language learning strategies as there are many other factors

contributing as well.

• In studies involving language learning strategies, language proficiency has

been studies using various methods:

(3) Proficiency

1. Through language proficiency and achievement tests

(Wen & Johnson, 1997).

2. Teacher’s judgements about their students’ language levels

(Magogwe & Oliver, 2007).

4. Self-assessment scores (Oxford &

Nyikos, 1989).

5. Hours of instruction (Victori& Tragant, 2003).

3. Self-descriptions

(Takeuchi, 2003).

6. Placement tests (Griffiths, 2003).

Findings (LLS & Proficiency levels)

High-proficiency learners:

• Using language strategies that involve interaction (Bremmer, 1999)

• Contextual guessing and encoding (Gu & Johnson, 1996).

• Compensation strategies (Green & Oxford, 1995).

• First language (L1) avoidance (Wen & Johnson, 1997).

• Paraphrasing (Phillips, 1990).

• Word analysis & note-taking (Takeuchi, 2003).

Lower-proficiency learners:

• Memorization and vocabulary learning (Griffiths, 2003).

• More relying on external sources (dictionaries) or overreliance on help from others like their teachers, parents or friends (Magogwe & Oliver, 2007).

• Magno et al. (2009) defined “language exposure” as the total amount of time of an individual learner is engaged with the language. It can be exposure from written sources, interaction with others, multimedia resources or even by passively listening where the language is being spoken.

• In a study done by Lessaux and Siegel (2003), the participants (who were from non-English speaking backgrounds) had successfully acquired adequate English proficiency levels after 2 years of being exposed to reading, spelling, and phonological processes of English language.

• Thus, an individual learner needs sufficient amount of time to acquire a new language, depending on the degree of exposure they have to the language (Victori & Lockhart, 1995).

(4) Levels of language exposure

• However, it‟s been argued that some studies

revealed how Chinese people who immigrated to

the English-speaking countries and have high

exposure of the language, were still found to low

proficiency levels in communicating using the

language (Flege et al., 1999).

• In relation to language learning strategies, the

levels of language exposure will determine

learner‟s motivation to learn the particular language

(Magno et al., 2009).

• For example, Kim and Margolis (2000) found that

there is positive correlation between motivation to

learn English when the learners watched a greater

amount of English-speaking television shows.

Thus, the high exposure to the language have

encouraged learners to enhance their methods and

strategies. in acquiring the language.

• There has been very little research into cultural background issues and language

learning strategies. As such, even defining „cultural background‟ is a difficult task

because of the complexities in identifying cultural groups as „singular collective‟

that can be compared among one another (Grainger, 2012).

• It has been found that European learners used language strategies more

frequently than learners from other nationalities because of their cultural ideals

and backgrounds (Griffiths, 2003).

• Asian background learners had been found to use more conservative strategies,

for example, repetition and rule-oriented strategies (Politzer & McGoarty, 1985).

• Similarly, Asian background learners had also been reported to prefer their own

rote learning strategies when learning a particular language (O‟Malley & Chamot,

1990).

(5) Cultural backgrounds

• The choice of language learning strategies also differ from certain

nationalities as some prefer to work independently as opposed to involving

in group work (Reid, 1987).

• Grainger (1997) studies 101 females and 33 males from different ethnic

backgrounds. Using questionnaire as the research instrument, he

discovered that there were significant differences in terms of language

strategy used according to the various cultural backgrounds.

Thank you

ReferencesBehroozizad, S., Amir, Z., Nambiar, R. 2012. The relationship between language learning strategies and teacher’s mediating role. 3L: The

Southest Asian Journal of English Language Studies, 18 (2): 35-48.

Bremmer, S. 1999. Language learning strategies and language proficiency: Investigating the relationship in Hong Kong. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 55(4): 490–514.

Brown, H. D. 2001. Principles of language learning and teaching. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Ellis, R. 1985. Understanding second language acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University.

Fazeli, S. 2012. The effect of personality traits on use of the cognitive English language learning strategies. International Journal of Linguistics, 4(1): 16-33.

Flege, J. E., Yeni-Komshian, G. H., & Liu, S. 1999. Age constraints on second-language acquisition. Journal of Memory and Language 41(1): 78-104.

Gao, X. 2010. Strategic language learning: The roles of agency and context. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.

Gibbon, P. 2003. Mediating language learning: Teacher interactions with ESL students in a content-based classroom. TESOL Quarterly, 37(2): 247-274.

Grainger, P.R., 1997. Language learning strategies for learners of Japanese: investigating ethnicity. Foreign Language Annals, 30(3): 379-383.

Green, J., & Oxford, R.L. 1995. A closer look at learning strategies, L2 proficiency, and gender.TESOL Quarterly, 29(2): 261–297.

Griffiths, C. 2003. Patterns of language learning strategy use. System, 31(3): 367–383.

Gu, Y., & Johnson, R.K. 1996. Vocabulary learning strategies and language learning outcomes. Language Learning, 46(4): 643–679.

Horwitz, E. K. 1999. Cultural and situational influences on language learners’ beliefs aboutlanguage learning: a review of BALLI studies. System, 27 (2): 557-576.

Kim, D. D., & Margolis, D. 2000. Korean student exposure to English listening and speaking: Instruction, multimedia, travel, experience and motivation. The Korea TESOL Journal, 3 (1): 39-47.

Lantolf, P. J. 2000. Socio-cultural theory and second language learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Lesaux, N. K., & Siegel, L.S. 2003. The development of f reading in children who speak English as a second language (ESL). Developmental Psychology, 39(6): 1005-1019.

Magno, C., de Carvalho, M., Lajom, J., Bunagan, K., & Regodon, J. 2009. Assessing the level of English language exposure of Taiwanese college students in Taiwan and the Philippines. Asian EFL Joumal, 11(1): 63-75.

Magogwe, J.M., & Oliver, R. 2007. The relationship between language learning strategies, proficiency, age and self-efficacy beliefs: A study of language learners in Botswana. System, 35(3): 338–352.

Marttinen, M. 2008. Vocabulary learning strategies used by upper secondary school students studying English as a second language. System, 2 (2): 263-274.

O’Malley, J.M., & Chamot, A.U. 1990. Learning strategies in second language acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Oxford, R.L., & Nyikos, M. 1989. Variables affecting choice of language learning strategies by university students. The Modern Language Journal, 73(3): 291–300.

Phillips, V. 1990. English as a second language learner strategies of adult Asian students using the Strategy Inventory for Language Learning. Californea: University of San Francisco.

Politzer, R.,& McGroarty, M., 1985. An exploratory study of learning behaviours and their relationship to gains in linguistic and communicative competence. TESOL Quarterly, 19(1): 103-123.

Reid, J.M., 1987. The learning style preferences of ESL students. TESOL Quarterly, 21 (1): 87-111.

Takeuchi, O. 2003. What can we learn from good foreign language learners? A qualitative study in the Japanese foreign language context. System, 31(3): 385–392.

Toyoda, E. 1998. Teaching kanji by focusing on learners’ developing of graphemic strategies by university students. Modern Language Journal, 73(3): 291-300.

Victori, M., & Tragant, E. 2003. Learner strategies: A cross-sectional and longitudinal study of primary and high-school students. In M.P. Garcia Mayo & M.L. Garc´ıa Lecumberri (Eds.), Age and the acquisition of English as a foreign language (pp. 182–209). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.

Vietori, M., & Loekhart, W. 1995. Enhancing metaeognition in self-directed language learning. System, 23(2): 223-234.

Walqui, A. 2006. Scaffolding instruction for English language learners: A conceptual framework. The International Journal of Bilingual Education & Bilingualism, 9(2): 234-257.

Wen, Q., & Johnson, R. 1997. Learner variables and English achievement: A study of tertiary-level English majors in China. Applied Linguistics, 18(1): 27–48.