the effectiveness of strategy use in second language learning · the effectiveness of strategy use...
TRANSCRIPT
María Justina Duarte Silva
María del Pilar Agustín Llach
Facultad de Letras y de la Educación
Grado en Estudios Ingleses
2013-2014
Título
Director/es
Facultad
Titulación
Departamento
TRABAJO FIN DE GRADO
Curso Académico
The effectiveness of strategy use in second language learning
Autor/es
© El autor© Universidad de La Rioja, Servicio de Publicaciones, 2014
publicaciones.unirioja.esE-mail: [email protected]
The effectiveness of strategy use in second language learning , trabajo fin de gradode María Justina Duarte Silva, dirigido por María del Pilar Agustín Llach (publicado por la
Universidad de La Rioja), se difunde bajo una LicenciaCreative Commons Reconocimiento-NoComercial-SinObraDerivada 3.0 Unported.
Permisos que vayan más allá de lo cubierto por esta licencia pueden solicitarse a lostitulares del copyright.
Trabajo de Fin de Grado
THE EFFECTIVENESS OF
STRATEGY USE IN SECOND
LANGUAGE LEARNING
Autor:
MARÍA JUSTINA DUARTE SILVA
Tutor/es: María Pilar Agustín Llach
Titulación:
Grado en Estudios Ingleses (601G)
Facultad de Letras y de la Educación
AÑO ACADÉMICO: 2013/2014
2
Declaration of Originality
To the best of my knowledge and belief, the content of this thesis is result of my own
work and it has never been written or published by anyone else before, with the
exception of the sources that have been used as a reference and which have been clearly
cited.
Signature: María Justina Duarte Silva
3
Acknowledgements
I would sincerely like to thank my tutor, María Pilar Agustín Llach, for her support and
guidance on this project. Without her supervision, I would not feel as confident and
satisfied with my work, since her assistance has been a great contribution to the efficacy
of the analysis. This said, I want to show my gratitude and delight for having had her as
my tutor.
4
Abstract
After many years of investigating learning strategies for second language learning,
scholars from all over the world have continued defining strategy use as a helpful tool
for language learners as well as teachers. Nowadays, the student has gained priority
over the teacher and, as a result, researchers have changed their previous concern on the
teaching techniques by the learning process. It is a well-known fact that teachers
generally provide the learner with guidance and advice to help him/her improve his/her
language learning. Nevertheless, teachers’ contribution stops being essential once the
student learns to study the second language self-sufficiently. Research findings have
revealed successful outcomes in second language learning when learners are well aware
of how their learning process works. In order to gain control and manage this type of
learning, language learning strategies must be regularly applied by the student.
However, in order to select the right strategies, learners must be first aware that some
factors may influence or alter their learning process. This implies the selection of
strategies depending on their own needs and profile. Finally, considering that learning a
first or second language is a long and time-consuming process, it is worth mentioning
the effectiveness of strategy use to keep learners´ interested in studying their second
language over time.
Key words: language learning strategies, second language acquisition/learning, foreign
language or second language, strategy use.
Resumen
Tras varios años de investigación sobre las estrategias de aprendizaje de una segunda
lengua, académicos de todo el mundo han continuado definiendo el uso de estrategias
como una herramienta útil tanto para estudiantes como para profesores. Hoy en día, el
estudiante ha ganado prioridad sobre el profesor y, como resultado, los investigadores
han cambiado su objeto de estudio en las técnicas de enseñanza por el proceso de
aprendizaje. Es de conocimiento público que el profesor generalmente proporciona guía
5
y asesoramiento al estudiante para ayudarle a mejorar su aprendizaje de la segunda
lengua. Sin embargo, su aportación deja de ser esencial una vez que el estudiante
aprende a hacerlo de forma autosuficiente. Hallazgos de investigación han revelado
resultados de éxito en el aprendizaje de una segunda lengua en casos donde los
estudiantes son profundamente conscientes del funcionamiento de su proceso de
aprendizaje. Para ganar control y manejar este tipo de aprendizaje, el estudiante debe
tener en cuenta el uso de estrategias habitualmente. No obstante, para poder seleccionar
las estrategias correctamente, es necesario que se conozcan los factores que pueden
influir o alterar su proceso de aprendizaje. Esto implica la selección de estrategias
dependiendo de sus necesidades y de su perfil. Finalmente, debido a que aprender la
primera o segunda lengua es un proceso largo que absorbe mucho tiempo, cabe
mencionar la efectividad del uso de estrategias para mantener el interés de los
estudiantes en continuar su aprendizaje de la segunda lengua a lo largo del tiempo.
Palabras clave: estrategias de aprendizaje de una segunda lengua,
adquisición/aprendizaje de una segunda lengua, lengua extranjera o segunda lengua, uso
de estrategias.
6
Table of Contents
1. Definition of language learning strategies ..................................................................7
2. Classifications of language learning strategies .........................................................15
2.1 Chamot and O´Malley´s classification .....................................................................15
2.2 Oxford´s classification ..............................................................................................16
2.2.1 Direct and indirect strategies ......................................................17
2.2.2 Subcategories: memory, compensation, etc. ..............................18
2.3 Observations on the classifications ...........................................................................20
3. Factors affecting strategy use....................................................................................21
3.1 Internal factors: learners’ individual characteristics ............................................22
3.1.1. Personality .................................................................................................22
3.1.1.1. Extroverted vs. Introverted .....................................................23
3.1.1.2. Intuitive-Random vs. Sensing-Sequential .................................24
3.1.1.3. Thinking vs. Feeling ..................................................................24
3.1.1.4. Closure-oriented/Judging vs. Open/Perceiving .........................25
3.1.1.5. Conclusions ...............................................................................26
3.1.2. Gender .......................................................................................................26
3.1.3. Age ............................................................................................................27
3.1.4. Motivation .................................................................................................27
3.2 External factors: learners’ experience with the second language ......................28
3.2.1 Study in home country vs. study abroad ..................................................29
3.2.2 Individual learning vs. teacher’s involvement ..........................................30
4. Measuring strategy use ............................................................................................32
5. Personal experience with strategy use .....................................................................35
6. Conclusions .............................................................................................................37
7. Bibliography ............................................................................................................38
7
INTRODUCTION
My curiosity in this field of knowledge began to grow significantly since my first
year of English Studies degree, when I began to become more familiar with the area of
Linguistics. Since my goal is to become an English teacher, knowing how to teach and
learn a second language has become an essential part of my training. Due to the
strategies’ potential of improving any type of learning, we would like to show
throughout this paper their influence on second language learning and the importance
that they have for both language learners and teachers.
Given that strategy use does not always receive the special attention that it should,
we intend to awaken all learners and teachers about the relevance of its application for
the enhancement of second language learning. For that reason, we will discuss how its
effectiveness has been generally achieved and how it has been understood over the
years. In order to accomplish this, we will research the most important and
distinguished works on ‘language learning strategies’, providing a general view of the
term. As a result, its main definitions, characteristics and classifications will be
introduced, following with its most influential factors, assessment instruments and our
most recommended strategies.
1. DEFINITION OF LANGUAGE LEARNING STRATEGIES
In this chapter we are going to focus on the explanation of language learning
strategies, introducing in the first place its background and the definitions provided by
some of the most renowned researchers: Rubin, Stern, O’Malley, Chamot, and Rebecca
Oxford. Once these definitions are displayed, we will make a brief comparative analysis
of these scholars’ viewpoints, including our own personal opinion of the main aspects
mentioned. Due to the controversy among researchers to define language learning
strategies, we are also going to discuss the problematic issue of referring to these
strategies as ‘conscious or unconscious’ actions, highlighting the importance of
‘consciousness’. Next, considering the different effects that strategy use has on second
language learning, we will display how the effective strategy use can be achieved by
learners to succeed. Lastly, since teachers have played a very important role in the
8
effective strategy use, we will conclude by mentioning how their contribution has made
a difference in the student’s language learning.
Beginning with the background of language learning strategies, it is worth
mentioning that research into the definition started to increase significantly in the mid-
seventies with scholars such as Rubin (1975) and Stern (1975). Their interest in
discovering the characteristics that identified the ‘good language learner’ triggered
curiosity among researchers for studying the impact that language learning strategies
had on the second language learner (J. M. O'Malley & A. U. Chamot, 1990). Generally
conceived as effective tools to improve language learning, language learning strategies
have demonstrated to have different effects when being applied by the learner.
Depending on how they are used, the student’s learning will be more or less successful.
As Richard (1994) pointed out, their effective use leads learners to succeed in learning
the second language, so we must keep in mind the significance of applying them
appropriately.
Over the years the definition of language learning strategies has been widely
acclaimed as a “fuzzy” term (Ellis, 1994, p.529). The “no consensus” (Wenden, 1991)
has led researchers to elaborate numerous theories according to their own perspective of
the concept. Because of the controversy caused by the variety of viewpoints, we find
many different definitions rather than a universal one, from which neither has been
considered to be right or wrong (Oxford, 1990, p.17). In order to clarify the prevailing
fuzziness, we will next discuss and comment on some of the main definitions.
Due to the significant influence that Rubin, Stern, O’Malley, Chamot and Rebecca
Oxford have had on the field of language learning strategies, most research studies on
this topic have frequently included these scholars’ works as a reference for
investigation. Rubin, along with Stern, was the first one in introducing the concept
learning strategies to the investigation on second language acquisition. However, the
definition she provides is not specifically about language learning strategies, but
learning strategies in general. Here, she refers to them as “...any sets of operations,
steps, plans, routines used by the learner to facilitate the obtaining, storage, retrieval,
and use of information” (Rubin, 1987, p.19). Likewise, Stern (1992) shows us a
definition of the same concept which, according to him, "is dependent on the
assumption that learners consciously engage in activities to achieve certain goals and
learning strategies can be regarded as broadly conceived intentional directions and
learning techniques" (p.261). Also O´Malley and Chamot (1990) introduced a definition
9
of learning strategies in which they appear described as “the special thoughts or
behaviours that individuals use to help them comprehend, learn, or retain new
information” (p.1). Despite these scholars’ attempts for defining learning strategies as
exact as possible in association with second language acquisition, it was particularly
Rebecca Oxford (1993) who accomplished the most precise definition, conceiving
language learning strategies as: “specific actions, behaviours, steps or techniques that
students (often intentionally) use to improve their progress in developing second
language skills. These strategies can facilitate the internalization, storage, retrieval, or
use of the new language. Strategies are tools for the self-directed involvement necessary
for developing communicative ability” (p.18). Apart from this definition, we can also
observe the twelve characteristics of language learning strategies that Oxford illustrated
in her book “Language Learning Strategies: What Every Teacher Should Know”,
published in 1990 (see figure 1):
Figure 1
Source: Oxford (1990:9) Features of Language Learning Strategies
Comparing all these definitions, we can see the main aspects of language learning
strategies that have been first taken into account by each scholar. Analysing the
definitions by Rubin (1987), Stern (1992), and O’Malley & Chamot (1990); we find a
clear coincidence in disregarding the connection of language learning strategies with
second language acquisition. Whereas Rubin (1987) introduces the concept to the
10
learning of any “language system” (p.19), Stern (1992) and O’Malley & Chamot (1990)
provide a general definition without specifying the type of learning they are referring to.
On the other hand, Oxford’s definition does show a clearer connection between learning
strategies and second language acquisition, by explicitly stating that the learning
strategies are applied by the learner to help him/her enhance second language learning
(Oxford, 1992/1993, p.18). Even though the descriptions by Rubin (1987), Stern (1992),
and O’Malley and Chamot (1990) are very abroad and unrelated to second language
acquisition, there are several aspects mentioned by each of them that will help us
provide a general notion of language learning strategies.
From Rubin’s definition we must note how particularly the words “plans” and
“routines”, which define the term “strategy”, have given an important connotation to the
meaning of language learning strategies. From the word “plans” it is implied by Rubin
that strategy use is intentional and goal-oriented. It is a well-known fact that “plans” are
carried out consciously and with a purpose. Therefore, we can understand Rubin’s
definition of learning strategies as conscious actions that learners execute in order to
achieve a certain goal in learning. Lastly, from the word “routine” is also suggested that
learning strategies are a sequence of actions that learners carry out regularly. According
to this description, Rubin believes in learning strategies as a procedure or system
characterised by an organized and regular use.
In the same way Rubin (1987) conceived learning strategies as “plans” or
conscious actions, Stern (1992) defined the concept as “activities” that learners
intentionally and consciously perform to “achieve certain goals” in learning. Less
specifically, Oxford (1993) described learning strategies as “specific actions,
behaviours, steps or techniques”; whereas O’Malley and Chamot (1990) used two
specific words: “thoughts” and “behaviours”. Since most research findings point out
that language learning strategies can be “behaviours” as well as “mental processes”,
Oxford’s use of the word “behaviours” to define the term does not seem very accurate if
the words “mental processes” or “thoughts” are not included in the definition. By
defining learning strategies as “thoughts or behaviours”, O’Malley and Chamot also
imply the “observable/unobservable” characteristic of these strategies. Research has
shown that language learning strategies are not always behaviours, mental processing is
also involved in the learner’s strategy use. Consequently, language learning strategies
require more than observation in order to be identified.
11
Besides Rubin and Stern, Oxford (1993) also defines language learning strategies
as “often intentionally”. Despite this corroborates Oxford’s view of language learning
strategies as conscious and planned actions, it is also inferred that strategies can be used
unconsciously as well. This would imply that learners also use strategies unintentionally
and without a purpose. A later definition provided by Oxford and Burry-Stock (1995)
confirmed, however, the view of “strategy” as a “conscious action towards achievement
of an objective” (p.8).
Because of this contradiction shown by Oxford and the “no consensus” (Wenden,
1991) among researchers, we find a constant debate as to whether language learning
strategies are only “conscious” or can be “unconscious” as well. Nevertheless, since it
has been proved to be general agreement about the goal-oriented and conscious
characteristic of the term “strategy”, we are going to support the definition of language
learning strategies as being only conscious as well. Supporting this view, besides Rubin
(1987) and Stern (1992); scholars such as Cohen, Pressley and McCornick have also
shown to agree with the intentional and conscious characteristics of learning strategies.
Their definitions can be seen below in figure 2:
Figure 2
“Strategies can be classified as conscious mental activity. They must
contain not only an action but a goal (or an intention) and a
learning situation”. (Cohen, 2007, p. 31)
“Learning strategies are intentionally used and consciously
controlled by the learner”. (Pressley & McCornick, 1995)
Considered as one of the most important criteria of language learning strategies,
“consciousness” has shown to be key word for language learners (Oxford, 1995: 1). As
conscious actions or “plans”, language learning strategies stand out by their goal-
oriented characteristic, which entails thinking ahead or premeditating the strategy use.
Because they are applied intentionally, learners can identify their use if asked.
Considering that these strategies are not always observable or easy to recognise, it is
worth mentioning the use of self-reports that help learners to identify them. Supporting
12
our view that language learners are always conscious of their strategy use, we also count
on Ellis’s (1994) statement, which declares that “strategies no longer accessible for
description through verbal report by the learner lose their significance as strategies”.
As we can see, there are several reasons why language learning strategies should be
regarded as conscious rather than conscious or unconscious. Even though sometimes
learners do not realize that they are applying strategies to learn the second language,
they are still conscious of their use, since they use them with a purpose. In brief, as long
as the learner’s strategies can be identified through observation, self-reflection or self-
report, its use is evident. In contrary, if strategies cannot be recognized through any of
these methods, their use will be questionable or, more explicitly, null.
Besides Oxford, others scholars such as Nold, Schaitmann and Wendt also believed
that cases where learners do not seem to be acknowledged of their strategy use are
because they are applying the strategies unconsciously. We can observe their view of
language learning strategies as conscious/unconscious actions through figure 3:
Figure 3
To our view, these scholars’ notion of strategies used unconsciously might emerge
from their confusion with the learner’s attentiveness to how his/her strategy use is being
carried out. Since we consider language learning strategies to be always applied
consciously, we need to remark that consciousness does not require recognizing the
language learning strategies while being applied. So, if the learner is not completely
13
attentive to which or how strategies are being applying, it does not mean for us that
he/she is using them unconsciously. We, instead, relate this to the attentiveness that the
learner shows while using the strategies. Evidently, the more attentive language learners
are to their strategy use, the better their learning is. As Oxford (1993) pointed out,
“strategies are tools for the self-directed involvement necessary for developing
communicative ability” (p.18). This implies that language learning strategies help
learners to get involved in their learning process, making this learning more controllable
and manageable. For that reason, it is important that learners bring the language
learning strategies to their focal attention, which allows them to achieve a more
effective strategy use and language learning. Therefore, it is convenient that learners are
completely attentive to every detail related to their strategy use. The more knowledge
they have about this use, the more control they can take over it. On the contrary, the
closer the language learning strategies are to the learner’s peripheral attention, the less
knowledge and control they will be have and the less successful they will be in learning
the second language.
After dealing with the “conscious” characteristic of language learning strategies,
we are going to take into account some of the other characteristics mentioned by Oxford
(1990) where language learning strategies appear described as “flexible”, “influenced
by a variety of factors”, “can be taught” and “expand the role of teachers” (p.9). In the
first place, we understand language learning strategies as “flexible” in that they can be
adjusted to the learner’s individual characteristics. It has been generally accepted by
researchers that “there is no given set of learning strategies that works for everyone”
(Rivera-Mills and Plonsky, 2007, p.543). According to Oxford (1990), there are many
factors that might affect the choice of learning strategies and the student’s learning
process: “degree of awareness, stage of learning, task requirements, teacher
expectations, age, sex, nationality, ethnicity, general learning style, personality traits,
motivation level, and purpose for learning the language”. For that reason, because each
learner is different, strategies must be chosen according to his/her own profile and
needs.
Considering the next characteristic, it must be noted that language learning
strategies can also be “taught” (known as “strategy instruction”) and “expand the role of
teachers”. As Griffiths (2007) pointed out, “teacher practices and perceptions are
critically important since they have the potential to influence the effectiveness of the
teaching/learning process” (p.91). Indeed, teachers have proven to contribute a great
14
deal to students’ learning process by training them to apply learning strategies
effectively. In order to implement strategy use in their students’ learning, teachers must
also use strategies that will help them provide an effective teaching. These strategies,
known as “teaching strategies”, coincide with language learning strategies in that both
intend to make second language learning more successful. According to Hong-Nam and
Leavell (2006), to make strategies effective for language learning, both teachers and
students need to pay attention to the “frequency” with which strategies are applied and
the “selection” that they make. Thus, they stated that “both the frequency with which
learners apply language learning strategies and the strategies they choose are
distinguishing characteristics between more successful and less successful learners” (p.
400). Similarly, Naiman, Frohlich and Todesco (1978) also believed that what makes
strategy use effective is the choice of strategies made. Thus, they proposed a series of
strategies that are believed to make students ‘good language learners’ (see figure 4):
Figure 4
1. Select language situations that allow one's (learning) preferences to be used
2. Actively involve themselves in language learning
3. See language as both a rule system and a communication tool
4. Extend and revise one's understanding of the language
5. Learn to think in the language
6. Address the affective demands of language learning
Rebecca Oxford. Online Resources: Digests (1994)
As we can observe, this list involves the learner’s active participation and
conscious control of the language learning strategies. So, no matter what strategies are
chosen according to the learner’s profile and needs, his/her learning must be always
characterized by self-direction and a conscious involvement.
In conclusion, language learning strategies have proven to be considerably
effective for students to successfully learn the second language. Through their use
learners achieve a better participation in their learning process by carrying out a more
organized and systematic learning. Therefore, whereas successful language learners are
characterised by self-direction, ineffective learners have shown to be prone to the
random application of language learning strategies. For that reason, it is fundamental to
15
know that only active involvement with strategy use will lead students to achieve
effective language learning.
2. CLASSIFICATIONS OF LANGUAGE LEARNING STRATEGIES
In the same way numerous researchers have tried to define language learning
strategies, the classifications have also been scholars’ main concern “to describe the
correspondence between mental processes and strategic processes” (O’Malley and
Chamot, 1990). By classifying the language learning strategies, both language learners
and teachers are able to identify the existing strategies and take them into account in
second language learning. However, we must be aware that “there is no complete
agreement on exactly what strategies are; how many strategies exist; how they should
be defined, demarcated, and categorised; and whether it is –or ever will be- possible to
create a real, scientifically validated hierarchy of strategies...Classification conflicts
are inevitable” (Oxford, 1990, p. 17).
Despite the ambiguity of the term, we need to know that these classifications have
allowed us to get an overview of how strategies can be applied by learners to
accomplish different learning tasks. Thus, Wenden and Rubin proposed their own
classifications in 1987; Rebecca Oxford, O'Malley and Anna Uhl Chamot, in 1990;
Stern, in 1992; Ellis, in 1994, and so forth (Gamage, 2003). Even though each scholar
proposed his own theory of classification, the majority of them seem to share a similar
perception of how language learning strategies are organized and structured. In order to
exemplify it, we are going to deal with two of the most influential models of
classifications: the one proposed by O´Malley and Chamot (1990), and the one
presented by Rebecca Oxford (1990). Once these classifications are introduced, we will
conclude with some personal observations on both models, discussing the precision that
these two scholars showed through their works.
2.1 Chamot and O´Malley´s classification (1990)
In a research conducted by O’Malley and Chamot in 1990, they came to the
conclusion that language learning strategies do not consist only of the direct
involvement of the second language, but also the indirect is involved. Thus, on the basis
of Rubin’s classification of direct and indirect strategies, they proposed the cognitive
16
and metacognitive categories. Additionally, in order to highlight the relevance that
interaction and emotional self-control had on second language learning, they added a
third category known as socio-affective. For a better understanding we will next explain
the three categories, also showing some examples of strategies that correspond to each
of them.
First of all, the cognitive category has been ascribed to those strategies which
require the learner’s mental processing to be able to understand and learn the
information of the second language. Closely related to Rubin’s “direct strategies”, this
category comprises strategies such as “elaboration, grouping, inferencing, and
summarizing” (O’Malley & Chamot, 1990).
As for the metacognitive category, also called “self-management” strategies by
Wenden (1991) has been defined as the “higher order executive skills that may entail
planning for, monitoring, or evaluating the success of a learning activity” (O’Malley &
Chamot, 1990, p.44). This type of category, associated to Rubin’s indirect strategies,
has been considered to help learners to reflect upon and raise awareness of their
learning process. By applying these strategies, learners are therefore allowed to achieve
a self-regulated learning and better cognitive skills.
Lastly, the socio-affective category has been addressed by O’Malley and Chamot
(1990) to strategies which “help learners regulate and control emotions, motivations,
and attitudes towards learning, as well as help learners learn through contact and
interaction with others”. Examples of these strategies are “questioning for clarification,
cooperation, and self-talk”.
2.2 Rebecca Oxford´s classification (1990)
Through Rebecca Oxford’s book published in 1990 we can observe that her model
of classification used the two types of strategies that Rubin introduced in 1981: direct
and indirect strategies. Additionally, Oxford subdivided this classification into six other
subcategories: memory, cognitive, compensation, metacognitive, affective and social
(Oxford, 1990). In order to have a better picture of this classification we can observe
figure (5), which includes both groups and the different examples of strategies.
Following this figure, direct and indirect strategies will be discussed in section 2.2.1,
concluding with the explanation of the six subcategories in section 2.2.2.
17
Figure 5
Oxford’s Language Learning Strategy Classification
2.2.1. “Direct and “indirect” strategies
As we mentioned previously, Oxford (1990) used the classification of direct and
indirect strategies proposed by Rubin (1981) in order to develop her own theory of
classification. However, whereas Rubin classified this group in relation to their
contribution to the language learning, Oxford identified them according to the
involvement with the second language. Thus, she defined direct strategies as strategies
which “directly involve the target language and require mental processing of the
language” (Oxford, 1990, p.37). On the other hand, indirect strategies were understood
as strategies which “provide indirect support for language learning through focusing,
planning, seeking opportunities, controlling anxiety, increase cooperation and empathy
and other means” (Oxford, 1990, p.151). Contrasting her definition of direct strategies,
she points out that “indirect strategies support and manage language learning without
directly involving the target language” (Oxford, 1990, p. 135). Taking this into account,
direct strategies are referred then to those strategies through which we absorb, store and
retrieve information. In other words, they are applied to learn the second language. In
comparison, indirect strategies serve as a support for learners to be able to manage and
18
practice the knowledge that they have acquired through direct strategies. As Oxford
(1990) pointed out, indirect strategies “support and regulate the learner’s language
learning based on his or her learning style, affective traits and behavioural”.
Considering the importance of both strategies and the effect they have on our learning,
we must know that we need to make them work together so that we can achieve a self-
regulated learning (Oxford, 1990a, pp. 14-16).
2.2.2 Subcategories: memory, cognitive, compensation, metacognitive, affective and
social strategies
It must be observed that Oxford’s subcategories include all the categories proposed
by O´Malley and Chamot (1990) in their classification: the metacognitive, cognitive and
socio-affective strategies. However, Oxford classifies all of them into two groups: on
one side we have the cognitive strategies, and on the other side, the metacognitive and
socio-affective. Aside from that, Oxford splits the socio-affective strategies into two,
distinguishing between social and affective strategies. These two types of strategies are
considered as indirect along with the metacognitive ones. As for the strategies which
belong to the direct category, we find not only the cognitive strategies but also two
more additions that Oxford presented: memory and compensation.
After providing an overview of how Oxford classified language learning strategies,
our next step will be to explain the function of each of the six strategies she dealt with.
To begin with, we are going to speak first about the strategies which belong to the direct
category (memory, cognitive and compensation), concluding with those corresponding
to the indirect category (metacognitive, social and affective strategies). According to
Oxford (1990b), memory strategies “aid in entering information into long-term memory
and retrieving information when needed for communication" (p.71). In other words,
they are applied by learners in order to store information coming from the second
language. Aside from that, she believed that this kind of strategy was mostly used
during the first stages of our learning process. The reason she gave for that was that
once we are familiarized with the structures, vocabulary or the second language in
general, we become less aware of its usage. Thus, she stated in her article published in
2003 that “memory strategies are often used for memorizing vocabulary and structures
in initial stages of language learning, but that learners need such strategies much less
when their arsenal of vocabulary and structures has become larger” (p.13). In addition
19
to this, she showed in her book addressed to teachers, several examples of memory-
related strategies such as ‘creating mental linkages’, ‘applying images and sounds’,
‘reviewing well’ and ‘employing action’ (1990, p.17).
Secondly, as to the cognitive strategies, Oxford (1990b) defines them as strategies
“used for forming and revising internal mental models and receiving and producing
messages in the target language" (p. 71). This type of strategy allows students to
understand and learn the information they receive from the target language by, for
example, ‘repeating’, ‘analysing’, ‘deducing’, ‘interpreting’, ‘summarizing’, and so
forth (Oxford, 1990b). It is generally assumed that this kind of strategy might be the
most frequently employed by students. As far as I am concerned, particularly the
repetition of words is the most common strategy used by the majority of learners, since
it is something that we start doing from our childhood in order to acquire our mother
tongue.
Concerning the compensation strategies, Oxford (1990b) provided a very precise
definition which addresses to them as strategies that are “needed to overcome any gaps
in knowledge of the language” (p.71). The usage of these strategies is assumed to help
the learner to understand information from the target language related to grammar or
vocabulary by guessing from context. This means that when the learner does not know a
certain word or expression, he makes assumptions of its meaning by means of his own
experience and knowledge.
Focusing now on the indirect category will explain the metacognitive, affective and
social strategies. As O’Malley and Chamot (1990) pointed out in their classification,
metacognitive strategies are applied by students in order to plan, organize or asses their
learning process efficiently. This allows them to take charge of their learning and have
it under control. Whereas planning and organizing help the student to regulate his
learning, constant evaluation is also very important, since this leads the learner to
realize whether his/her learning is progressing or not. Some examples of these strategies
provided by Oxford (1990) are: “overviewing and linking”, “setting goals”, “self-
monitoring”, “self-evaluating”, and so on (p.17).
Affective strategies, on the other hand, are understood as those strategies used so as
to control the factors (feelings, attitude, emotions, motivation, etc.) that may influence
the student’s learning. Some of the strategies that the learner may employ within this
category are: ‘encouraging self-talk’, ‘deep breathing’, ‘meditation’, and so forth
(Oxford, 1990). We must mention that as the learner improves his L2 proficiency,
20
his/her need to apply affective strategies will start decreasing, which is due to his/her
own personal growth. In other words, by managing the affective strategies, he/she is
able to shape or manipulate his/her weaknesses in order to show a better performance of
his/her L2 skills.
Finally, Oxford (1990b) defined social strategies as those strategies which
“facilitate interaction with others, often in a discourse situation" (p. 71). Considering
that language is a way of communication, these strategies are considered quite relevant
in language learning. Interacting with native speakers does not only help the learner to
put his command of the second language into practice, but it also allows him, just like
the affective strategies do, to increase his motivation, self-confidence, In addition to
this, his cultural knowledge grows considerably as well, which is caused by the social
integration.
2.3. Observations on the classifications
Through this section we will express own personal point of view concerning both
models of classifications that O’Malley and Chamot (1990) as well as Oxford (1990)
proposed. To begin with, we must say that Oxford’s classification of direct and indirect
strategies seems a little confusing particularly when she refers to social strategies as
indirect strategies, meaning that they do not involve the target language. Since we
believe that this type of strategy does involve the second language, we do not consider
Oxford’s view of these strategies as indirect very accurate. Interacting with native
speakers or getting engaged in social activities has generally shown a huge immersion
of the learner into the second language. Thanks to my years abroad studying English, I
have been able to experience this at first hand. The more I used social strategies, the
more in touch I was with my second language and the more I learned. Therefore, given
that this kind of strategies have appeared to be more than a support for language
learning, I would identify it as direct rather than indirect. In contrast, Oxford’s view of
affective and metacognitive strategies as indirect strategies does seem to be more
precise and logical, since we can apply them without involving the second language.
This means that they only help us to control and manage emotions and learning, not to
learn directly the new language.
Between O’Malley and Chamot’s classification and the one presented by Oxford,
we must remark that O’Malley and Chamot’s seems to be simpler and more
21
understandable. Even though Oxford’s theories have been quite accepted by
researchers, we believe her classification is rather confusing and imprecise, and makes
it more difficult to overcome the fuzziness of the term. Instead, O’Malley and Chamot’s
seems to be more helpful to get a better understanding of what strategies consist of.
3. FACTORS AFFECTING STRATEGY USE
Learning a second language is a very complex and long process which is likely to
be affected positively or negatively depending on many different factors. We certainly
know that strategy use has been considered a very effective and helpful way to enhance
language learning. But it is worth mentioning that the choices of strategies that learners
make must be carried out rationally and according to their own profile if they want their
learning to succeed. For that reason, before selecting any strategy, students must reflect
upon the effects that their individual characteristics and experiences with the second
language would have on them. This way, they can prevent possible failure or mistakes
in the way they learn. It is important, therefore, that we identify first which factors may
influence our learning, so that we can see which strategies are going to be required to
make our learning more successful.
We must also keep in mind the fact that not all the strategies are going to be useful
or positive for every student, since everyone has his own needs. As Oxford (1989b)
specified, differences in language learners may be found in several factors such as:
“age, sex, attitudes, motivation, language learning goals, motivational orientation,
learning style, aptitude, career orientation, national origin, language teaching methods,
tasks requirements, language being learned, duration, and degree of awareness”
(Khamkhien, A. 2010, p.66)
In view of this, we are going to discuss, according to our own perspective, those
variables which seem to have had a stronger effect on language learning and strategy
use. To start with, we are going to divide them in two different groups: one the one
hand, we will find those considered as internal factors, and, on the other hand, those
which are regarded as external factors. Whereas the internal factors will be related to the
learner´s individual characteristics, the external ones will have to do with the context
and circumstances in which language learning is being carried out.
22
3.1 Internal factors
In this section, as we can observe, we are going to focus on some of the factors that
we associate with the learner’s personal characteristics, which are: personality, gender,
age, and motivation.
3.1.1. Personality
In 1989, Ehrman and Oxford carried out an investigation where they examined the
effects that learners´ individual characteristics have on language learning strategies.
Even though they firstly did not find a clear connection between personality and
strategy use, it was in a later study, in 1990, when they found that learners´ personality
type had strong effects on the usage and choice of language learning strategies (Ehrman
& Oxford, 1995).
In order to explain this factor better, we are going to introduce first a definition of
the term so that we can understand its involvement in language learning. According to
Richards and Schmidt (2002) personality appears defined as “those aspects of an
individual´s behaviour, attitude, beliefs, thoughts, actions and feelings which are seen
as typical and distinctive of that person and recognized as such by that person and
others” (p. 275). Considering this, we find many different types of personality not only
among learners but among people in general. As we know, thanks to these individual
differences, we can distinguish some people from others, and this is equally applied to
language learners.
Evidently, there are different kinds of learners: some of them are successful or very
efficient, whereas some others are rather prone to failure. Generally, this is linked, in
part, to the type of personality that we have, which based on Ehrman and Oxford´s
statement, “consist of four strands: extroverted vs. introverted; intuitive-random vs.
sensing-sequential; thinking vs. feeling; and closure-oriented/judging vs.
open/perceiving” (Ehrman & Oxford, 1990). This means that we can find learners who
are extroverted or introverted, intuitive-random or sensing-sequential, thinking or
feeling, and so on. In relation to second language learning, it has been observed that
some of these types of personality appear to be more helpful than others for the student.
In order to see how they can affect our learning process, we are going to give next a
23
brief explanation of their meanings, dealing in the first place with the
extroverted/introverted type of personality.
3.1.1.1 Extroverted vs. introverted
If we searched for the definition of the word “extroversion”, we would find
something similar to this: “1. An outgoing, overtly expressive person; 1.1 Psychology.
A person predominantly concerned with external things or objective considerations”
(Oxford Dictionary). Extroversion has proven to contribute positively to language
learning, since this kind of learners show a better involvement within social contexts
and feel comfortable applying socio-affective strategies to improve their learning. This
does not only boost their motivation and self-confidence but it also gives them the
chance to put their L2 proficiency into practise. Moreover, the fact that they are more
open up and outgoing helps them to learn more from other people and see their own
mistakes as well. On the contrary, introverted learners appear described as “shy,
reticent, and typically self-centered” (Oxford dictionary). Since they do not tend to
respond positively to social contexts, they are more likely to opt for activities which do
not require to be publicly exposed. However, as we may know, exposition is one of the
most important requirements that learners need to overcome in order to learn a second
language. It is fundamental that we interact with native speakers and face the fear to be
exposed, or what is the same, apply socio-affective strategies, so that we are more likely
to succeed in learning.
Concerning the strategy choices that both extroverted and introverted learners
commonly make, research has proven that “extroverts show a strong preference for
social strategies” whereas “introverts use metacognitive strategies more frequently”
(Ehrman & Oxford, 1990). Through this statement we can perceive the influence that
these kinds of personality have had on strategy use, and consequently, on language
learning. This said, we must consider that extroversion is a very helpful type of
personality for language learning, whereas introversion tends to affect the learner rather
negatively in most cases, by raising feelings of insecurity, fear, and discomfort, which
hinder the learner’s improvement.
24
3.1.1.2. Intuitive-Random vs. Sensing-Sequential
Analysing now these two types of personality, we must remark in the first place
that language learning, as an endless process, requires a lot of consistency. This means
that the learner must be patient and persistent along the whole learning process. Also, he
has to be aware that he will always need to follow a systematic and organized
methodology if he wants to make his learning process safer. As some scholars
(Abraham & Vann, 1987; Chamot et al., 1996) have asserted, the more prepared and
planned the learner carries out his learning process, the more efficient it will be. As a
matter of fact, research has shown that unsuccessful learners are often characterized by
their intuitive-random type of personality (Oxford, 2003).
Normally, intuitive-random students prefer to follow a more random and unplanned
methodology to learn their second language, which is commonly linked to their
freestyle and/or lack of perseverance. Thus, they opt for carrying out the learning
process in their own way, disregarding therefore any kind of instruction or guidance
from teachers or educators. However, it has been proven that planning and managing
our learning on a regular basis does make a big difference. As we know, it is essential
for the learner to keep constant track of his learning process. By taking control of it, the
student is more likely to keep a progressing rhythm and, therefore, learn more
efficiently.
We must take into account that in order to accomplish this, even if the learner does
not have a sensing-sequential personality, he can achieve this control through the
regular use of metacognitive strategies, which certainly helps to regulate and enhance
language learning. Considering this, we can conclude by asserting that the sensing-
sequential type of personality seems to be more beneficial for a language learner, since
constancy and search for guidance and instruction are key words to succeed in language
learning.
3.1.1.3. Thinking vs. Feeling
Whereas in the previous descriptions we saw that some types of personality seem
to be more positive than others, in this case, there is no clear evidence of which one is
better for the language learner. However, we do believe that the combination of both
qualities could turn out to be more helpful than the predilection of only one, since both
25
of them have their own advantages and disadvantages. For instance, a thinking learner is
more objective than the feeling learner, which comes in handy depending on the
situation. On the one hand, the learner may be more focused on his learning tasks, but
on the other hand, his lack of empathy and compassion might make his social
interaction more difficult. On the contrary, feeling learners show to be more considerate
and empathetic, allowing them to build social bonds more easily. Despite this leads the
learner to a higher self-esteem, he must be consequently careful with his emotional
expressions, since they have been also considered to interfere with or hamper language
learning. In other words, being feeling also implies being more susceptible, which
means that it is easier for the learner to lose control over his emotions and his language
learning as well. So, the feeling type of personality is not always positive. Taking this
into account, we could consider a good language learner to that one whose personality
shows a balance between the thinking and feeling types.
3.1.1.4. Closure-oriented/Judging vs. Open/Perceiving
Finally, as for these personality types, closure-oriented or judging students have
been described as serious, analytic, hardworking learners. In comparison with them,
open or perceiving students have been characterized by their flexibility and openness.
Furthermore, since judging learners are oriented to a more persistent and rigid learning
style, they are more likely to keep constant track of their learning process. Moreover,
their preference for judgements and tasks with deadlines makes them work harder and,
sometimes, under pressure. Even though this personality type seems to fit perfectly
within a classroom context, it has been asserted by Ehrman and Oxford (1989) that
“open learners sometimes do better than closure-oriented learners in developing
fluency”. This is probably due to the fact that open learners normally view the L2
learning as something enjoyable rather than a serious task, which helps them feel more
comfortable with it and, therefore, make their learning more easy-going. Nonetheless,
they are also more feeling and inconstant, and consequently, they are more likely than
judging students to lose control over their learning. Since, just like thinking and feeling
learners, both personality types have their own pros and cons, finding a balance between
them seems to be the best way to learn the second language successfully.
26
3.1.1.5. Conclusions
As we can see, the way learners use their learning strategies depends, in great part,
on their own personality. For that reason, it is essential that the choice of language
learning strategies is made not only according to the learner´s profile, but also according
to his/her own needs. This means, for instance, that if the learner is a inconstant, flexible
and feeling person, it would be unarguably better for his/her learning to make use of
strategies that will help him/her overcome the downsides of his/her personality type.
Thus, by strengthening his/her weaknesses, the learner is more likely to shape the way
he/she normally learns, reaching the type of personality that the good language learner
generally has.
3.1.2. Gender
It has been discussed by several researchers the influence that gender has on the
usage of language learning strategies. Several studies such as those by Chamot &
Keatley (2004), and Hong-Nam & Leavell (2006) have reported that there may be some
evidences that support the view that sex and strategy use are related in some way. Other
investigations (for instance, Goh & Kwah, 1997; Green & Oxford, 1995) found that
gender does produce a strong effect on the choice of language learning strategies and on
the frequency of their usage. According to these research findings, strategies are more
frequently applied by women than by men, which could be probably related to the fact
that women are normally more active and dynamic in classroom contexts (Khamkhien,
A., 2010, p.70-71). Another researcher who also agreed with this statement was
Dongyue (2004), whose studies revealed that women seem to be better than men at
controlling emotions. Added to that, she pointed out that the differences in strategy use
by female and male learners could also be consequence of other factors, which means
that it does not have to be necessarily because of their gender.
Personally, I believe that the relationship between gender and strategy use seems
confusing rather than clear, since there is not an agreement with the way in which
strategies should be used by each gender. Likewise, other researchers such as Dadour
and Robbins (1996), Oh (1996) and Park (1999) agreed with this fact and tried to
display it throughout their investigations (Sherafat, Z., 2014, p. 60).
27
In brief, we can say that women and men do not always differ from each other in
strategy use. Nevertheless, many situations where they show differences have been
found. In such case, as we mentioned above, it is women who tend to apply language
learning strategies more often.
3.1.3. Age
As regards with the relationship between age and strategy use, we must mention
the fact that age has shown to have influence not only during the language learning
process but, particularly, on strategy use. As we know, children, adolescents and adults
have different ways of learning a second language. Generally speaking, children seem
to be faster than older students when it comes to pronunciation. Instead, adolescents and
adults have shown to be better at learning the grammatical aspects of the language
(Cenoz, J. & J. Perales. 2000). There is no doubt that it is better to learn a second
language from an early age. However, there is not total guarantee that, by doing so, the
learner will acquire the native-speaker proficiency, since there are other factors which
may hamper his/her learning process as well.
Last but not least, we must consider the fact that the lack of motivation sometimes
may be related to the learner´s age. For example, adults are more easily discouraged
than younger learners when studying a second language or applying learning strategies.
For that reason, it is important that the learner makes sure that the strategies he/she
chooses are the most appropriate for his/her age in order to maintain maximum
motivation.
3.1.4 Motivation
In order to reveal which kinds of language learning strategies students generally
use, Oxford and Nyikos (1989) carried out a survey which involved 1,200 language
learners from a Midwestern American University. As a result, they found that
motivation is one of the most powerful influences on the choice of strategies. For that
reason, research on this factor started to be more considered by scholars from then on.
As Gardner (1985) pointed out, “motivation” and “attitudes" are “the primary sources
contributing to the success of individual language learning” (Khamkhien, A., 2010, p.
72). According to Dörnyei (2001), motivation “explains why people decide to do
28
something, how long they are willing to sustain an activity, or how hard they are going
to pursue it” (p.7). It is a well-known fact that interaction with native speakers and
engagement in social activities are two really good ways to increase motivation. Also, it
is important that the learner sets goals in his learning, so that he shows more
determination and involvement in the process.
Since motivation makes learners be more involved in the learning process, it is
reasonable to think that a more effective usage of strategies is being carried out, and a
better learning is also achieved. Thus, Gardner along with Machintyre (1993) asserted
that motivation leads to more proficiency. In general terms, learners characterized by a
higher L2 proficiency level are conceived to make use of a larger extent of language
learning strategies. As opposed to that, students with lower proficiency level have
proven to pay less attention to strategy use. In short, we can say that thanks to
motivation, the proficiency level is more likely to be enhanced. Other researchers
(Yutaka, 1996; Pintrich & Schuk, 2002) have also showed their support on this view by
saying that there is a strong chance that students with higher motivation apply a wider
range of language learning strategies (Khamkhien, A., 2010).
With this in mind, under no circumstance we do must forget how significant this
factor has been considered in language learning so far, which means that it should
always be taken care of by learners as well as by teachers.
3.2 External factors: learners’ experience with the second language
This section is going to be totally focused on the experience in studying the second
language, which has to do with the learning context and environment in which the
second language acquisition is being carried out by the learner. The factor experience
has been considered one of the most important external variables affecting strategy use
and language learning in general. In order to show its relevance, we are going to deal
specifically with some of the most common ways in which learners acquire their second
language: on the one hand, either in home country or abroad; and on the other hand,
either individually or with the teacher’s involvement. Depending on these settings then,
the learning can be affected either positively or negatively.
29
3.2.1. Study in home country vs. study abroad
First and foremost, based on my experience as a foreign student, I would like to
mention that learning abroad has shown to be incredibly helpful for the learner to gain
experience with foreign languages and also promote his personal growth and
motivation. Because of its numerous advantages, it has been generally conceived as the
most effective way to succeed in language learning. Compared to learners who study in
their home country, study abroad allows us learners to get a better grasp of the new
language as well as enrich our knowledge about its culture. By emerging ourselves into
the foreign culture and customs, our motivation is more likely to increase and so are our
proficiency level and communicative skills. The opportunity of interacting with native
speakers and getting involved in countless different situations helps us have a more
active participation in our language learning. This way, instead of limiting ourselves to
a classroom, we becomes full-time learners and are able to learn the second language
through our five senses, which is more similar to the way we acquire our mother tongue.
Because acquiring the foreign language is fundamental for us to adjust and adapt to
the new culture, our determination to learn tends to be stronger than it is when we study
in our home country, since learning becomes a necessity rather than an obligation, so to
speak. Since we come to realize that we need to learn as effective as possible for our
own sake, we try to look for the most effective ways to achieve it. Hence, we make a
more frequent usage of learning strategies. However, learning abroad does not only
influence the frequency of strategy use, but also the strategy choices that we students
make. This said, it must be noted that there is a significant difference, for instance, in
the usage of socio-affective strategies depending on whether the learning is being
carried out abroad or not. Apparently, studying in a foreign country seems to lead us to
apply these strategies more often than normal. This probably have to do with the fact
that being immersed in the foreign culture makes us feel more comfortable and willing
to put our L2 proficiency into action.
We also find evidences about the effects of studying abroad by scholars such as
Clarke, Flaherty, Wright, and McMillen (2009); Salisbury (2011); Braskamp, L. A., D.
C. Braskamp, and K. C. Merrill (2009), who also believed in the great amount of
benefits that this experience offers to students. For example, it was stated by the latter
that “education abroad has become an increasingly important educational program
(experience) in global learning and development, intercultural competence,
30
intercultural maturity, and intercultural sensitivity of students” (Braskamp, L. A., D. C.
Braskamp, and K. C. Merrill, p. 101). Indeed, I have been able to experience these
multiple advantages at first hand through my time abroad, which has marked a
milestone in all aspects: considerable improvement in L2 proficiency, communicative
skills, language learning strategy use, cultural knowledge, personal growth, etc.
In conclusion, learning abroad provides learners with many invaluable life
experiences which cannot be reached from their homeland. In general, when the learner
studies in his home country, his learning is mostly book-based, since he does not have
as many opportunities to interact with native speakers as one living abroad does.
Moreover, most things around him have to do with his culture, so it makes it harder to
learn his second language from a cultural perspective without being influenced by his
own.
3.2.2. Individual learning vs. teacher’s involvement
Either whether learners study the second language in their home country or abroad,
there is another very important factor which seems to be quite influential on their
language learning and strategy use: the teacher´s involvement or the classroom setting.
As we know, not every language learner has a teacher at his disposal in order to guide
his learning, since not everybody can afford to have professional help. We can find
plenty of reasons why it happens to be this way, but the point we want to put across is
that being provided with a teacher has been generally considered a privilege so far. Here
we can see the difference between learning a first and a second language. Whereas
learning our mother tongue is a fundamental and necessary part of our culture, acquiring
a second language is rather optional for the education of the majority of people. We are
aware that nowadays students normally receive basic knowledge of a second language,
but in most cases, they tend to fail to communicate fluently. This failure may be
consequence of the fact that learning a foreign language has been frequently taken as an
academic pursuit that students must overcome to fulfil certain academic requirements.
But, once these requirements are accomplished, they are likely to lose interest in
improving their language learning.
Since we live in a globalized world where speaking foreign languages is becoming
every time more and more necessary for either our professional or personal lives, it is of
great account to instruct people about how to become successful learners. On account of
31
this, teaching has been therefore considered to play a significant role in language
learning, particularly in cases where students do not know how to become self-sufficient
learners. Broadly speaking, the teacher’s involvement supposes a better guidance for
language learning, as his/her job is all about guiding and advising students through the
whole learning process. This entails, at the same time, to raise their awareness about
strategy use, the importance of language learning, the keys to become a good language
learner, etc. All this proves that his/her contribution to the student’s learning, as is very
helpful and such effects tend to influence positively (Griffiths, 2007, p.91). However, it
is also true that teachers are not always good at instructing all this and, frequently,
students fail as a consequence of their ineffective way of teaching. For that reason, it is
essential then to make sure first that the teacher’s involvement is the right one, and that
we learn to be self-directed so that our language learning keeps progressing regardless
of the teacher’s help.
To conclude, we would like to point out that it is key to know that studying a
foreign language has multiple and diverse benefits for us, and so, it should not be
considered only for academic purposes. We need to broaden our goals regarding its use
and include it as a part of our lives. Furthermore, either the learner decides to study in a
classroom setting or by his/her own; it must be constantly kept in mind that the effective
usage of language learning strategies will always be useful for him/her achieve self-
sufficiency and control in his/her learning. By means of its use he/she is more likely to
take the learning process seriously and ensure his/her continuous improvement. In
general terms, because teachers are specialists in strategy instruction and tend to implant
it inside the classroom, it has been observed that students under this kind of context
apply learning strategies more often than those who learn independently. Even though
we also find exceptional cases in which autonomous learners stand out for their
incredible self-direction and consistency with his language learning, commonly,
classroom settings seem to be more commanding and imposing for students to learn.
Instead, studying independently requires much more will power and determination to be
able to carry out an effective learning, something that most people hardly accomplish.
32
4. MEASURING LANGUAGE LEARNING STRATEGY USE
Taking into consideration the previous chapters, we can say that the given
information has served as a thorough insight into language learning strategies; we have
learned about its different definitions, characteristics, classifications, uses, influential
factors, etc. But, lastly, we need to answer another question which is thought to clear up
possible doubts about the identification of strategy use. Speaking more explicitly, we
have already discussed the frequency and choices of language learning strategies
depending on the diverse circumstances. However, we have not yet specified how such
assessments of strategy use are executed. Consequently, we are going to set forth in this
chapter how strategy use has been normally measured and which measurement
instrument has been the most frequently used around the world. Once this instrument is
identified, we will show the most well-known example by Rebecca Oxford, the Strategy
Inventory for Language Learning (SILL) (1989). From the research findings into this
inventory, the book by Oxford & Burry-Stock (1995) will serve us as our main
reference to explain what SILL consists of.
Keeping in mind the fact that language learning strategies can be either “mental
processes or behaviours”, it has been generally stated that in order to identify their
usage, the only method to capture both unobservable and observable actions is self-
report (Cohen, 1998; O’Malley & Chamot, 1990; Rubin, 1975; Wenden, 1991). Even
though there is not absolute certainty about its efficacy, it has not been discovered
another way to detect the learner’s mental processing.
Researchers have provided learners with diverse types of report to collect data
about their usage of language learning strategies and learning experiences: diaries,
journals, interviews, questionnaires, and so forth. These surveys have been conceived as
tools extremely useful for teachers to reveal as much information as necessary about
their students’ learning, including their strategy use and the problems they may find
through the mentioned process. However, their utilization does not only help teachers
but also students, since the realization of such reports lead them to reflect upon their
learning by developing metacognition (Oxford & Burry-Stock, 1995).
It is important to note that the variety of reports is immense, since the elaboration
of such surveys can be adjusted to a specific interest or purpose, such as the teacher’s
main concern or the learner’s profile. It is highly probable that the more relation both
33
survey and respondent have, the more questions will be answered. This may result in a
closer proximity to the learner’s reality.
According to scholars, questionnaires have been discovered to be the most frequent
report used for the identification of language learning strategies. Considered as the most
effective method, they have also proved to have some limitations. Forgetting or lying
about the strategy use as well as misunderstanding the questionnaires are the main
reasons why the results may turn out to be deceitful. For that reason, it is important to
elaborate them as precise as possible for the learner. For example, doing questionnaires
after a certain task is performed tends to report more accurate answers than when done
randomly (Oxford & Burry-Stock, 1995). This has to do with the fact that learners are
more likely to answer correctly when their memory about their strategy use is more
recent or fresh (Rubin & Thompson, 1994; Weaver & Cohen, 1997; Chamot & Küpper,
1989; O’Malley & Chamot, 1990; Oxford et al., 2004).
Among all the existing questionnaires, according to Oxford and Burry-Stock
(1995), the Strategy Inventory for Language Learning (SILL) (1989) has been the most
frequently applied to assess strategy use in second language learners. Although it was
initially for the U.S Defense Language Institute, its implementation in diverse
institutions from all over the world turned it into the most universal and reliable
assessment instrument.
In order to reveal how students´ learning process is commonly carried out in
second language acquisition, Oxford´s inventory collects general data from language
learners around the world. With several versions for students of different nationalities
(English, Spanish, French, German, Portuguese, Italian, Russian, Japanese, etc.), this
instrument consists of a two-form questionnaire. Whereas, one form has been addressed
to learners studying English as a foreign language, the other one is for native English
people learning other languages (Oxford & Burry-Stock, 1995). In view of its universal
character, this instrument has been also used for discovering how strategy use generally
influences students´ learning process. For example, some studies based on the SILL
revealed the great impact that strategy use has on language proficiency (Ehrman &
Oxford, 1989; Oxford & Nyikos, 1989; Phillips, 1991; Green, 1991).
In regard with the content of the questionnaire, SILL (1989) shows different
language learning strategies representing each of the six subcategories by Oxford (1990)
(cognitive, compensation, memory, metacognitive, affective and social strategies).
Based on a 1-5 scale that indicates the frequency with which the strategy is applied by
34
the learner, this inventory identifies the way the student’s learning process is carried
out. In order to better understand this description, we will illustrate an example of the
questionnaire “Version 7.0 (ESL/EFL)” (see Figure 6).
Learning strategy
Figure 6
Frequency of use Version 7.0 (ESL/EFL) © R. Oxford. 1989
To conclude we must highlight the relevance that self-reports have shown over the
years. Their usage has been very helpful for both learners and teachers to make
language learning strategies more explicit and raise awareness of the learning process.
This helps not only to see the wide range of strategies that exist and may be useful for
the learner, but also to better recognize those strategies that are normally applied to
learn the second language. This way, the learner is able to take good control of his/her
language learning and make sure his/her strategy use is being well-used, allowing both
teaching and learning effectiveness to be assessed.
35
5. PERSONAL EXPERIENCE WITH STRATEGY USE: IMPORTANCE OF
SOCIO-AFFECTIVE STRATEGIES
Among the three types of strategies proposed by O’Malley and Chamot, cognitive
strategies have proved to be the most frequently used by learners, whereas the socio-
affective ones are hardly taken into consideration (Chamot and Küpper, 1989). Due to
the little attention that both teachers and students pay to the socio-affective strategies,
we would like to highlight through this section the importance that this strategy use has
had on second language learning.
We can find many reasons why students often overlook socio-affective strategies;
sometimes it is because they are shy, or because they are afraid of making mistakes or
their motivation is low, etc. In that case, learners must know that they have to overcome
these obstacles if they really want to learn, since there is no learning without practice,
let alone in language learning. As people normally say, practice makes perfect, and to
my view, interacting with foreign speakers or being involved in social activities are the
best ways to learn from mistakes and put your knowledge into practice. However, this is
a difficult task to carry out when you are not surrounded by foreign speakers, since it
requires a lot more of patience, perseverance and effort; reason why students´ failure is
so frequent. Therefore, it is important that, in classroom contexts, teachers show their
students the benefits of exposing their speaking competence without fear. As learners
we must know that mistakes are and will always be part of our training, but also that we
should always make a good use of them. In order for them to be positive for our
learning, we always need to admit them first; without realization there is no learning.
In my experience, learning a foreign language has never been easy; at the
beginning I tried to keep progressing with my English, but classes at school and college
were not enough. Teachers did not use to give any kind of inspiration to learn, and as a
result, my motivation tended to go down. Strangely enough, this is the kind of answer
that I normally find when asking language learners about the reason why they usually
fail. We are taught from the very beginning about the importance of using the correct
grammar, writing, etc. before we are maybe able to speak fluently. This usually leads
students to feel uncomfortable or restricted when putting their speaking competence into
action. We can observe the opposite when it comes to learn our mother tongue. In this
case, it is by interacting with people and our surroundings that we begin to develop our
communicative skills, which we can associate with the usage of socio-affective
36
strategies. This way, we learn to speak more naturally and fearlessly, increasing then
our self-confidence and taking the learning to higher levels. Instead, when learning a
foreign language, most of students barely use socio-affective strategies. As a result,
their confidence with the second language is not strong enough and so their learning is
likely to fail. We must bear in mind then that even though we might be unable to learn a
foreign language in the same way we acquired our mother tongue, there are some
important requirements that we should always apply to our learning: perseverance,
determination, curiosity, eagerness to learn, and last but not least, fearlessness to make
mistakes. These are characteristics that we normally find in our childhood during the
acquisition of our mother tongue, but that eventually we may end up losing. So, it is
important that students receive inspiration to learn from their teachers and that their
motivation is taken care of.
As an English student, I have been able to get some insight into language education
and the way teachers generally give their lessons. In numerous cases, students
experience failure in their learning as a consequence of following the wrong methods,
strategies or techniques. Consequently, they start losing their interest or give up on
learning. This proves that the language learning process is not only about studying a
language but also about developing or working on the learner´s motivation to keep
interest in learning. In my situation, it was especially by living in the culture of my
second language that I started feeling more comfortable speaking my second language.
It has been generally acclaimed that when learning becomes a need, the learning process
is carried out in a faster and easier way. This way, your willingness to learn is stronger.
In conclusion, travelling or living abroad has become to me the best way to learn a
foreign language, since the application of socio-affective strategies becomes more
natural and automatic through social interaction with native speakers. Through this type
of experience we can learn how important it is to show speaking competence, since it is
especially by speaking or interacting that we realize how much we have acquired. For
example, my command of English did not seem to show much progress till my learning
started to be more focused on this type of strategies. Interacting with native speakers
and taking part in different activities helped me a lot to open up and work on my
speaking competence. As a matter of fact, all my communicative skills seem to have
improved considerably. So, I would like to encourage all students and teachers to pay
more attention to this type of strategies in order to enhance learning.
37
6. CONCLUSION
From this paper we must remark the effectiveness that strategy use has proven to
have on second language learning. Through investigation into this topic, we have been
able to see in which ways this effectiveness can be achieved by both language learners
and teachers. After discussing the definitions provided by top researchers, we have
reached to the conclusion that language learning strategy use must be firstly
contemplated and understood by the learner before putting it into action. It is important
therefore that these strategies are examined and applied with complete attentiveness,
allowing learners to gain absolute control of his/her learning process.
Through the models of classifications displayed in the second section of the paper
we have been able to see explicitly the numerous strategies that there exist and can help
us learn the second language. Even though language learning strategies has been
considered to be an ambiguous term, we must note that its effectiveness is pretty clear
when applied appropriately. Considering the great variety of factors that may affect
strategy use and language learning, it is key for learners to be acknowledged of how and
what strategies can be helpful for their improvement. This said, we must not forget the
importance of selecting strategies according to the learner’s profile and needs. Because
each learner is different, we cannot support then the view that some strategies are better
than others. We need to know that the choice of strategies is dependent on each learner,
and that the strategies generally considered as best by some students could be useless
for others.
In the fourth section we have talked about how self-reports have helped to measure
strategy use by language learners. We must note the relevance that such application has
had in order to assess not only learning but also teaching. Particularly questionnaires
have stood out among the different strategy assessment instruments and have provided a
general view of how strategies are mostly applied by learners. Yet, using the most
common strategies does not guarantee successful language learning and, for that reason,
the learner must be first fully informed of what strategy use consists of.
Finally, we have attempted to show through the last section the significance that
interactional strategies has had on second language learning according to my own
experience. Taking into account the multiple benefits of their use, we can assert that
these strategies have been extremely useful for the learner specifically to increase
his/her own personal growth, which contributes greatly to the learning process.
38
In short, language learning strategies are very important to be considered in second
language learning. Notwithstanding, it has been proven that their use is not always
carried out appropriately by learners. But, if they are so effective, why students
normally do not know how to apply them? Is it maybe teachers’ fault for not providing
students with strategy instruction?
7. BIBLIOGRAPHY
- Braskamp, L.A., Braskamp, D.C., Merrill, K.C. (2009). Assessing progress in global
learning and development of students with education abroad experiences. Frontiers:
The Interdisciplinary Journal of Study Abroad, 13, 101-118.
- Cenoz, J. & J. Perales. 2000. “Las variables contextuales y el efecto de la
instrucción en la adquisición de segundas lenguas”. In C. Muñoz, C. (ed.) Segundas
lenguas. Barcelona: Ariel. 109-126.
- Cohen, A. D. (2007). "Coming to terms with language learner strategies: Surveying
the experts". In A. D. Cohen & E. Macaro (Eds.), Language learner strategies: 30
years of research and practice (pp. 29 – 45). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- Dongyue, L. (2004), EFL Proficiency, Gender and Language Learning Strategy Use
Among a Group of Chinese Technological Institute English Majors. Arecls E-
Journal, 1 (A5).
- DÖRNYEI, Zoltan. (2001a). Motivational Strategies in the Language Classroom.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- Ehrman, M. & Oxford, R. (1989). Effects of sex differences, career choice, and
psychological type on adults´ language learning strategies. Modern Language
Journal, 73(1), 1-13.
- Ehrman, M. & Oxford, R. (1990). Adult language learning styles and strategies in
an intensive training setting. Modern Language Journal, 74, 311-317.
- Ehrman, M. & Oxford, R. (1995). Cognition plus: Correlates of Language Learning
Success. Modern Language Journal 79 (1), 67-89.
- Ellis, R. (1994). The Study of Second Language Acquisition. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
- Foreign Language Annals, 22, 447-454. Oxford, R.L. (1989b). The role of styles
and strategies in second language learning.
39
- Gamage, GH (2003). Issues in Strategy Classifications in Language Learning: A
Framework for Kanji Learning Strategy Research, ASAA ejournal of Asial
Linguistics & Language Teaching.
- Gardner, R. C., & MacIntyre, P. D. (1993). A student's contribution to second
language learning. Part II: Affective variables. Language Teaching, 26, 1-11.
- Griffith, Carol. (2007). Language Learning Strategies: Students’ and Teachers’
Perceptions. ELT Journal Volume 61/2 April 2007. Oxford University Press.
- Hong-Nam, K. and Leavell A. Language learning strategy use of ESL students in an
intensive English learning context. Department of Teacher Education and
Administration, University of North Texas, Denton, TX 76203, USA. System 34
(2006) 399–415.
- Khamkhien, A., (2010). Factors Affecting Language Learning Strategy Reported
Usage by Thai and Vietnamese EFL Learners. Electronic Journal of Foreign
Language Teaching, Vol.7, No.1, pp. 66–85 © Centre for Language Studies National
University of Singapore.
- Naiman,N., Frohlich, Stern & Todesco. 1978. The Good Language Learner.
Cited in Stern. 1983. Fundamental Concepts of Language Teaching. Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
- Nold, G./Schnaitmann, G. (1997). "Lernstrategien in verschiedenen
Tätigkeitsbereichen des Fremdsprachenunterrichts. Lassen sich passende Strategien
finden? (Ein Zwischenbericht)." In: Rampillon, U./Zimmermann, G. (1997), 135-
149.
- O'Malley, Michael J et al. (1985). Learning Strategies Used by Beginning and
Intermediate ESL Students. Language Learning. Vol.35 No.1. pp 21-44.
- O'Malley, M. & Chamot, A. (1990). Learning strategies in second language
acquisition. New York: Cambridge University Press.
- Oxford Dictionary: Extrovert
<ttp://www.oxforddictionaries.com/us/definition/american_english/extrovert>
Consulta: 25 de Mayo del 2014]
- Oxford Dictionary: Introvert
<http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/us/definition/american_english/introvert>
[Consulta: 25 de Mayo del 2014]
- R. Oxford (1989). Strategy Inventory for Language Learning (SILL). Version 7.0
(ESL/EFL)
40
- Oxford, R.L. & Nyikos, M. (1989). Variables affecting choice of language learning
strategies by university students. The Modern Language Journal, 73/3, 291-300.
- Oxford, R. (1990). Language learning strategies: What every teacher should know.
New York: Newbury House.
- Oxford, R. L. (1990a). Language learning strategies and beyond: A look at
strategies in The context of styles. In S. S. Magnan (Ed.), Shifting the Instructional
Focus to the Learner (pp. 35-55). Middlebury, VT: Northeast Conference on the
Teaching of Foreign Languages.
- Oxford, R. L. (1990b). Language Learning Strategies: What Every Teacher Should
Know. Boston: Heinle and Heinle Publishers.
- Oxford, R. (1992/1993). Language learning strategies in a nutshell: Update and ESL
suggestions. TESOL Journal, 2(2), 18-22.
- Oxford, R. (1994). Language Learning Strategies: An Update. Online Resources:
Digests. University of Alabama
<http://www.cal.org/resources/digest/oxford01.html> [Consulta: 29 de Mayo del
2014].
- Oxford, R. & Burry-Stock, J. A. (1995). Assessing the use of language learning
strategies worldwide with the ESL/EFL version of the Strategy Inventory for
language Learning (SILL). System, 23, 153-175.
- Oxford, R. L. (2003). Language learning styles and strategies: an overview. Ph.D.
- Pressley, M., & McCormick, C. B. (1995). Advanced educational psychology: for
educators, researchers, and policymakers. New York: Harper Collins College
Publishers.
- Richard, J. C. (1994). Reflective teaching in second language classroom. New York:
Cambridge University Press.
- Richards, J.C. and Schmidt R. (2002), Longman Dictionary of Language Teaching
and Applied Linguistics, 3rd edition, London: Longman.
- Rivera-Mills, S. V., & Plonsky, L. (2007). Empowering students with language
learning strategies: A critical review of current issues. Foreign Language Annals,
40(3), 535-548. doi:10.1111/j.1944-9720.2007.tb02874.x
- Rubin, J. (1975). What the “good language learner “ can teach us. TESOL
Quarterly, 9, 41-51.
- Rubin, J. (1981). The study of cognitive prodessed in second language learning.
Applied Linguistics, 2, 117-131.
41
- Rubin, J. (1987). Learner strategies: Theoretical assumptions: Research history and
typology. In A. Wenden and J. Rubin (Eds.), Learner strategies and language
learning (pp. 15-29). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
- Sherafat, Z. (2014). The Differences between Iranian Male and Female Students in
Using Language Learning Strategies. International Journal of Education & Literacy
Studies ISSN 2202-9478 Vol. 2 No. 2; Copyright © Australian International
Academic Centre, Australia
- Stebleton, Soria, Cherney (2013). The High Impact of Education Abroad: College
Students’ Engagement in International Experiences and the Development of
Intercultural Competencies. Frontiers: The Interdisciplinary Journal of Study
Abroad.
- Stern, H.H. (1975). What can we learn from the good language learner? Canadian
Modern Language Review, 31, 304-318.
- Stern, H.H. (1992). Issues and Options in Language Teaching. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
- Wenden, A. (1991). Learner strategies for learner autonomy: Planning and
implementing learner strategy training for language learners. N.J.: Prentice Hall.
- Wendt, M. (1997). "Strategien und Strategieebenen am Beispiel von Lernaktivitäten
im Spanischunterricht". In: Rampillon, U./Zimmermann, G. (1997), 77-94.