Language Learning Strategy Preferences of Asian EFL Learners

Authors

1 Assistant Profesor of TEFL, Islamic Azad University of Malard

2 PhD Candidate of TEFL, Islamic Azad University, Science and Research Branch

Abstract

Responding to the controversies in the results of past studies concerning the effect of nationality/ethnicity on using language learning strategies, this study adopts Oxford’s (1990) strategy inventory for language learning (SILL) to report Iranian male college level EFL learners’ pattern of strategy use and compare it with other Asian EFL learners’ strategy use pattern. This comparison might hopefully enhance scholars’ understanding about the role of nationality/ethnicity in learners’ choice and use of strategies and would also add to the literature in the field. As such, the results of the study revealed that the Iranian participants are medium strategy users (M = 3.31) and resembled many other Asian background EFL learners. Descriptive statistics, multivariate analysis of the variances (MANOVA) and follow-up post-hoc comparison tests used in this investigation showed that the participants perceived using metacognitive (M = 3.79) and social (M = 3.82) categories of strategies at a high level and significantly (p < .05) higher than other categories of the SILL. Memory (M = 2.89) and affective (M = 2.75) categories of strategies turned out to be least favored by them and were less significantly (p < .05) used than other categories listed in SILL. The results of individual strategy item analysis were in conformity with the above results. Based on the noticeable similarities discovered in the strategy use pattern of Asian EFL learners, the author suggested some guidelines for teachers and policy makers working in Asian EFL context.
 
 

Keywords


Article Title [Persian]

اولویت های زبان اموزان ایرانی در بکارگیری استراتژیهای یادگیری زبان

Authors [Persian]

  • جلال کمال زاده 1
  • کاوه جلیل زاده 2
1 استادیار دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی واحد ملارد
2 دانشجوی دکترای دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی واحد علوم تحقیقات
Abstract [Persian]

این تحقیق پاسخی به تضادهای موجود در نتایج مطالعات انجام شده در ضمینه تاثیر ملیت/قومیت  در استفاده از راهبردهای یادگیری زبان میباشد. این تحقیق با بکارگیری پرسش نامه اکسفورد(1990) گزارشی از الگوی بکارگیری این راهبردها توسط زبان اموزان دانشجو و مذکرایرانی ارایه داده و ان را با الگوی بکارگیری این استراتژی ها توسط زبان اموزان اسیایی تبار مقایسه می کند. امید میرود که این قیاس بتواند درک ما را در مورد نقش ملیت/قومیت در انتخاب و کاربرد این راهبردها افزایش داده و به ادبیات موجود در این حوضه بیفزاید.نتایج بدست امده از این تحقیق نشان داد که شرکت کنندگان ایرانی در این مطالعه با معدل (M=3.31) کاربران متوسط این راهبردها هستند و از این حیث شباهت زیادی با بسیاری از زبان اموزان اسیایی تبار دارند.امار توصیفی بکار رفته در این مطالعه به همراه تحلیل چند گانه واریانس(MANOVA ) نشان داد که زبان اموزان ایرانی با معدل ((M=3.79 در راهبردهای فراشناختی و معدل (M=3.82) در راهبردهای اجتماعی در حد بالایی از این راهبردها استفاده میکنند که به طور معناداری (p<.05 ) بالاتر از معدل انها در انواع دیگر راهبردهاست.نتایج این تحقیق همچنین نشان داد معدل راهبردهای حافظه ای انها((M=2.89 و معدل راهبردهای عاطفی انها(M=2.75) به طور معناداری پایین تر از معدل انها در دیگر انواع راهبردهای موجود در پرسش نامه اکسفورد است. نتایج تحلیل انفرادی راهبردهای به­کار گرفته شده توسط شرکت کنندگان ایرانی در این مطالعه با نتایج بالا کاملا مطابقت داشت. بر اساس شباهت قابل توجهی که در الگوی بکارگیری راهبردهای زبان آموزی زبان اموزان آسیایی تبار مشاهده میشود محققین در پایان این مطالعه راهکارهایی برای مدرسین و سیاست گزاران این حوضه که در کانتکس اسیایی فعالیت میکنند، پیشنهاد می کنند.
 

Keywords [Persian]

  • راهبردهای یادگیری زبان
  • ملیت یا قومیت
  • زبان اموزان اسیایی تبار
  • انگلیسی به عنوان زبان خارجی
  • الگوی استفاده از راهبردها
Bedell, D. A., & Oxford, R. L. (1996). Cross-cultural comparisons of language learning strategies in the People's Republic of China and other countries. In R. L. Oxford (Ed.), Language learning strategies around the world: Cross-cultural perspective (pp. 47-60). University of Hawaii at Manoa: Second Language Teaching and Curriculum Center.

Bialystok, E. (1978). A theoretical model of second language learning. Language Learning, 28, 69-83. 

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

Chamot, A. (1993). Student responses to learning strategy instruction in the foreign language classroom. Foreign Language Annals, 26, 308-321.

Chang, F. (2009). Language learning strategies of Taiwanese college level EFL/ESL learners. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Alliants International University.

Chang, S. J. (1991). A study of language learning behaviors of Chinese students at the university of Georgia and the relation of these behaviors to oral proficiency and other factors. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Georgia, Athens, the USA.

Cohen, A. (2007). Coming to terms with language learner strategies.  In A. D. Cohen, & E.  Macaro (Eds.), Language learner strategies (pp. 29-45). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Ellis, R. (1994). The study of second language acquisition (p. 530).Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

Green, J. M. (1991). Language learning strategies of Puerto Rican university students. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of Puerto Rico Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages. San Juan, Puerto Rico.

Griffiths, C. (2007). Language learning strategies: Student`s and teacher`s perception. ELT Journal, 61(2), 91-99.     

Griffiths, C. (2008). Lessons from good language learners. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Griffiths, C., & Parr, J. M. (2000). Language learning strategies, nationality, independence and proficiency. Independence, 28, 7-10.

Kafipour,R., Jabbari, M., Soori, A., & Shokrpour, N. (2011). Utilization of language learning strategies by Iranian post graduate students and their attitude and motivation toward English learning. Higher Education of Social Science, 1(2),10-18.

Mochizuki, A.(1999). Language learning strategies used by Japanese university students. RELC Journal, 30(2), 101-113.

Naraghi Zadeh, A. (2004). The culturally dependent diversification of learning behavior based on the learning-style model “Experiential Learning” and a case study of Iranian student teachers. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Cuvillier Verlag, Gottingen.

Nikoopour, J., Amini, M., & Kashefi, J. (2011). Language learning strategy preferences of Iranian EFL learners. Paper presented at theInternational Conference on Social Science and Humanity, Singapore.

Noguchi, C. T. (1991). Questionnaire for learners. Tottori, Tottori University, Japan.

Oh, J. (1992). Learning strategies used by university EFL students in Korea. Language Teaching, 1, 3-53.             

Ok, L. Y. (2003). The relationship of school year, sex and proficiency on the use of   learning strategies in learning English of Korean junior high school students. Asian EFL Journal, 5(3), 1-36.

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

Oxford, R. L. (1990). Language learning strategies: What every teacher should know. Boston, MA: Heinle & Heinle.

Oxford, R. (1992/1993). Language learning strategies in a nutshell: Update and ESL suggestions. TESOL Journal, 2, 18-22.    

Oxford, R. L. (1999). Relationship between second language learning strategies andlanguage proficiency in the context of learner autonomy and self-regulation. In A. D. Cohen, & E. Macaro (Eds.), Language learner strategies (pp. 47-68). New York, NY: Oxford.                      

Oxford, R., & Burry-Stock, J. (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., & Schramm, K. (2007). Bridging the gap between psychological and sociocultural perspectives on L2 learner strategies. In A. D. Cohen, & E. Macaro (Eds.), Language learner strategies (pp. 47-68). New York, NY: Oxford.

Park, G. (1997). Language learning strategies and English proficiency in Korean university students. Foreign Language Annals, 30(2), 211-221.

Peacock, M., & Ho, B. (2003). Students language learning strategies across eight disciplines. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 13(2), 179-200.

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

Riazi, A., & Rahimi, M. (2005). Iranian EFL learners’ pattern of language learning strategy use. The Journal of Asia TEFL, 2, 103-129.

Rubin, J. (1981). The study of cognitive processes in second language learning. Applied Liguistics, 2, 117-131.

Sadighi, F., & Zarafshan, M. (2006). Effects of attitude and motivation on the use of language learning strategies by Iranian EFL university students. Journal of Social Sciences & Humanities of Shiraz University, 23(1), 71-80.

Weinstein, C., & Mayer, R. (1986). The teaching of learning strategies. In M. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed.,pp. 315-327). New York, NY: Macmillan.

Wharton, G. (2000). Language learning strategy use of bilingual foreign language learners in Singapore. Language Learning, 50, 203-243.

Yang, N-D. (1994). An investigation of Taiwanese college students’ uses of English learning Strategies. Research report, National Taiwan University, Taiwan.

Yang, M. (2010). Language learning strategies of English as a foreign language university student in Korea. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Indiana State University, Indiana, USA.