VLCKOVA, K. Foreign language learning strategies. In ECER.
Vídeň : University of Vienna & ECER/EERA, 2009.
1
Foreign Language Learning
Strategies
ECER - Vienna - 2009
2
Strategies
Katerina Vlckova
Contents
State of knowledge on learning strategies
– concept, classification, problems
Methods
– research questions, research method, sampling, analyses
Results
– use of strategies, factors influencing use of strategies, effect of
strategies on achievement
Discussion
– comparison of results over time, across age groups and countries
Conclusion
– for instruction and research
3
Theoretical background
Learning strategies
Strategic competency
Competency to learn
Strategic behaviour
Learning patternsLearning patterns
Learning style, cognitive style, learning techniques
Foreign language vs. second language
Language acquisition and learning strategies
Effect of strategies on achievement
Variables influencing the strategy choice
Individual differences in strategies
4
Theoretical background
Strategies are viewed as
• set of actions or steps taken by learners
– to enhanced their learning,
– to improve the development of their language skills (Oxford 1992)
• the way in which the learner selects, acquires, or integrates new knowledge
(Weinstein, Mayer 1986)
An intensive focus on learning
strategies is connected with
the development of cognitive
psychology.
(Weinstein, Mayer 1986)
Problems in the research field of strategies
• problems with agreement on what strategies are („moving target syndrome“)
• strategies vs. techniques
• learner strategies (Ellis, Tarone) vs. learning strategies (Cohen, Oxford)
• conscious vs. unconscious
• problems with classification
• conceptual links between strategies and learning styles, personality and
demographic variables
5
Research on Strategies
The early research started with successful learners.
Successful learners
• tend to apply strategies in an orchestrated way relevant to their
own needs and characteristics of the task (Cohen 1990,
O'Malley, Chamot 1990, Oxford 1990, Wenden, Rubin 1987).O'Malley, Chamot 1990, Oxford 1990, Wenden, Rubin 1987).
Less successful learners
• sometimes do not know what strategies they use,
• are aware of just a few non-communicative strategies (Nyikos
1987),
• employ strategies in a random manner (Vann, Abraham 1989).
6
Development of strategy research
Early research Current research
1980s/1990s swung between two ends of a
continuum (good - less successful learners)
•General patterns of desirable behaviour
with high level of within subject variation
•Specific examples of behaviour with little
scope for within subject variation, related to
Recent work has focused on specific examples
of strategic behaviour in the contexts of
specific tasks and skills.
7
scope for within subject variation, related to
non-specific tasks.
Earlier work suggested that a successful
learner had a vast repertoire of strategic
behaviour.
Why is it that certain learners are able to
combine strategies more effectively than
others?
Unproblematical linking strategies with
achievement.
Independent variables (learning stage,
beginning of learning, rate of progress,
achievement level relative to peers etc.) affect
or are related to the strategy deployment.
Taxonomy
of language learning strategies I.
O'Malley (1985)
Metacognitive strategies
– planning, thinking about learning process, monitoring,
evaluating learning, directed attention, selective attention, self-evaluating learning, directed attention, selective attention, selfmanagement,
functional planning, delayed production etc.
Cognitive strategies
– repetition, resourcing, translation, grouping, note taking,
deduction, recombination, imagery, auditory representation,
key word, contextualization, elaboration, transfer, inferrencing
Socio-affective strategies
– cooperation, questions for clarification (Brown 1987)
8
Taxonomy
of language learning strategies II.
Rubin (1987)
direct – indirect strategies
Learning strategies
• Cognitive LS
– clarification, verification; guessing,
inductive inferrencing; deductive
Stern (1992)
• Management and
planning strategies
• Cognitive strategiesinductive inferrencing; deductive
reasoning; practice, memorizing;
monitoring
• Metacognitive LS
– planning, setting goals, selfmanagement
etc.
Communication strategies
– participating in conversation, getting
meaning across, clarifying etc.
Social strategies
9
• Cognitive strategies
• Communicativeexperiential
strategies
• Interpersonal strategies
• Affective strategies
Taxonomy
of language learning strategies III.
Language learning strategies
• Identifying material that needs to
be learned
• Distinguishing the material to be
learned from other material
• Grouping material for easier
Strategies by language skill areas
• Listening
• Reading
• Writing
• Speaking
Cohen, Weaver (2006) – Strategy comparison
10
• Grouping material for easier
learning
• Practising
• Monitoring the results of their
efforts
Language use strategies
• Retrieval strategies
• Rehearsal strategies
• Communication strategies
• Cover strategies
• Speaking
• Vocabulary and translation
strategies
Strategies by function
• Cognitive
• Metacognitive
• Affective
• Social
Direct strategies Indirect strategies
Memory Cognitive Compensation Metacognitive Affective Social
Creating
mental
linkages
Practising
Receiving,
Guessing
intelligently
Centring your
learning
Lowering your
anxiety
Asking
questions
Taxonomy
of language learning strategies III.
linkages
Applying
images,
sounds
Reviewing
well
Employing
action
Receiving,
sending
messages
Analysing,
reasoning
Creating
structure for
input and
output
Overcoming
limitations in
speaking and
writing
Arranging and
planning your
learning
Evaluating
your learning
Encouraging
yourself
Taking your
emotional
temperature
Cooperating
with others
Empathising
with others
R. L. Oxford (1990)
11
Research questions
• Is the SILL inventory working in Czech conditions?
• How do upper secondary students in the Czech Republic
use FLLS?
• Are the results comparable to other countries?• Are the results comparable to other countries?
• Do the results support the theory of FLLS?
– Factors influencing the choice of FLLS?
– Effectiveness of FLLS?
– „A good language learner“ theory?
• Have the results changed compared to year 2004?
– According to the Czech curricular reform? 12
Method
SILL (Oxford 1990)
– Strategy Inventory of Language Learning
– one of the most widely used strategy inventory
– 6 scales
Examples of itemsExamples of items
„To understand unfamiliar words, I make guesses.“
„I first skim an English passage (read over the passage quickly)
then go back and read carefully.“
„I find the meaning of an English word by dividing it into parts
that I understand.“
5-point frequency scale
13
Reliability
Cronbach alpha 0,96
N = 1014 (Mis. 24 – casewise deleted)
Items 67 and 6 scales
Response „I don't know“ was included.
scales coefficient number of sum of
14
scales coefficient
Cronbach α
number of
cases
sum of
items
memory 0,82 1030 10
cognitive 0,86 1028 19
compensatory 0,84 1033 8
metacognitive 0,78 1030 15
affective 0,71 1030 7
social 0,88 1030 8
Data sampling
22 schools
22 – 73 students per school
Area of the South Moravia
Students of upper secondary comprehensive schools in the
Czech Republic (grammar schools)
– Penultimate year of study
• e. g. third year of the four- year grammar schools (70 %)
• the seventh year of the eight-year grammar school (19 %)
• the fifth year of the six-year grammar school (11 %)
Data collection trough instructed administrators
15
Participants
Number of respondents
• 1038
Gender
• 657 women, 372 men
– 9 respondents didn't answer
Age
• 17 - 22 years old• 17 - 22 years old
• mostly 18 – 19
• data collection in 2006
Year of birth
• 1984 (1 student), 1985 (3), 1986 (14)
• 1987 (449), 1988 (558)
• 1989 (3).
16
Data analyses
Descriptive statistics
Kolmogorow-Smirnov normality test
Non parametric techniques
– Kruscal-Wallis H-test, Mann-Whitney U-test
Spearman correlation coefficient
Software
– Statistica 6– Statistica 6
Missing data
– N differs depending on the analysis
Level of significance
– p < 0,05
– in most cases p = 0,00
17
Results
• Characteristics of participants and their
learning
• Strategy use
• Variables influencing the choice of strategy• Variables influencing the choice of strategy
• Effect of strategy use on achievement
• Stability of results
18
Characteristics of participants
• Most of the students were studying 2 languages (61%),
some 3 (31%)
• 98 % of students learned English, 72 % German, 27 %
French, 15 % Spanish, 10 % Russian, 17 % Latin
• Almost everybody started studying the first foreign
language before the age of 10.
• The strategies were assessed in a „preferred“ langue of
the students: 70 % of students proffered English, 20 %
German
19
Learning to learn. Competency to learn
• 37% of students reported that teacher never tells
them how to learn.
• 39 % students reported that teacher never practises
how to learn with them.how to learn with them.
• 32 % of students wrote that they didn’t know how to
learn, 38% students only partly knew.
• 37 % said they were not good at languages.
20
Strategy use
Strategies are at
average used at the
point 2,92 (N = 1033,
SD = 0,37) on a 5-point
scale (5 almost always).
The 6 groups of
strategies are used
Box & Whisker Plot
3,0
3,2
3,4
3,6
3,8
4,0
4,2
strategies are used
significantly differently:
ANOVA Chi-square (N =
1028, df = 5) =
2295,013, p < 0,00.
Compensatory
strategies are most
used, affective
strategies are least
used.
21
Mean
±SE
±SDprum strat
prum P
prum KG
prum K
prum M
prum A
prum S
1,4
1,6
1,8
2,0
2,2
2,4
2,6
2,8
3,0
Strategy use
Most used strategies
(over 3, 5 on the scale)
Overviewing a set of materials
Noticing and learning from errors
Selecting topic (directing the communication
to the themes with known vocabulary)
Least used strategies
(under 1,5 on the scale)
Mind mapping
Using physical responses or
sensations
to the themes with known vocabulary)
Adjusting (simplifying) one's messages
Guessing
Using a circumlocution or synonym
Highlighting
Using of dictionaries and encyclopaedias
Repetition
Getting help (asking for the missing
expression)
22
Over 2 on the scale were used:
Using mechanical techniques
Using imagery (remembering by
means of visual images)
Planning and setting goals of
learning
Variables influencing strategy choice
Gender
Girls used strategies more (R = -0,21, p = 0,00)
• Boys only used 2 strategies more than
girls: combining of known phrases (R =
0,14, p = 0,00 ), guessing (R = 0,08, p =
0,01).
Teacher
Language
Students learning English used more cognitive
strategies. Students learning German used more
memory strategies and social strategies than
students learning English.
Number of learned languages
The more languages students reported to learn,
the more strategies were used (R = 0,15, p =Teacher
If teacher tells students how to learn , they
use learning strategies more. If teacher
practises, the relation is a bit stronger.
Self-efficacy
If students report they learn effective, they
know how to learn, they use more
strategies (R = 0,32, p= 0,00).
If they stated they were good at the language,
they used strategies more (R = 0,24, p =
0,00).
23
the more strategies were used (R = 0,15, p =
0,00).
Time of learning
No influence found, only by single strategies.
Time of starting learning first language
The earlier they started, the more they used
memory strategies and social strategies. The
later they started, the more they used
compensatory strategies
Effect of strategies on achievement
Knowledge
• The more the students applied strategies, the better knowledge was
reported. Social strategies were the most relevant (R = 0,20, p = 0,00).
• There was a negative relation between knowledge and compensatory
strategies.
School gradesSchool grades
• The more the students used strategies, the better their school grade was.
• There was negative relation with affective strategies, which were most
used by learners with worse grades.
Effectiveness of learning
• The more the students used strategies, the higher the effectiveness of
learning was.
24
Discussion
SILL application in the Czech Republic
SILL worked well and highly reliably in the Czech
Republic.
Some items seem to be culturally specific and not used• Some items seem to be culturally specific and not used
in the Czech Republic (like writing diaries about
language learning, mind mapping or employing action)
25
Discussion
Comparison with results for the Czech
Republic from the year 2004
• Most used and least used strategies are similar.
• The most used group of strategies (cognitive) and the at least
used (affective) are the same.
• On average, strategies were less used in 2004 (2,26) than in 2006• On average, strategies were less used in 2004 (2,26) than in 2006
(2,92).
• Effect of strategies on achievement partly differs:
– Effect on the learning effectiveness in both years (2004: R = 0,15, p = 0,00
N = 437)
– Effect on knowledge found in both years.
– Effect on school grades found in 2006, in 2004 only for cognitive strategies.
In 2006 negative effect for compensatory strategies, in 2004 for affective
strategies. 26
Discussion
Comparison with results for the Czech Republic
for children at the age of 10 and 14
Pupils use strategies most at the age of 10,
less at the age of 17,
and least at the age of 14.
The most and least used strategies are similar.The most and least used strategies are similar.
Variables influencing the strategy choice work across age:
– gender, number of acquired languages, teacher, good at language, I know
how to learn, early language learning,
Effect of learning strategies on achievement works across age:
– school grade; knowledge (not for pupils at the age of 10)
27
Discussion
Comparison with other studies and countries
• The most used strategies are compensatory strategies, the
least used ones are affective and memory strategies (Oxford
1987, Green, Oxford 1995, Bremmer 1999).
• Cognitive strategies show the best effectiveness (Oxford,
Green 1995).
• Practising is the key strategy (Bialystok 1978,1979, Huang,
van Narssen 1987, Oxford 1987).
28
Discussion
Support for FLLS theory? Controversies?
Gender
• In many studies girls use more strategies and different strategies than boys (Oxfrod 1986,
Oxfrod, Ehrman 1987, Oxfrod, Nyikos, Crookall 1987). Might be a socio-cultural
determination. Sometimes men overdo women in some strategies.
Time of language learning
• The influence is not found in all studies. Some influence is found (Oxfrod, Nyikos,
Crookall 1987).
Attitudes and beliefs
• Studies show the influence of self-concept, self-evaluation and self-efficacy, selfperception
(Dahl, Bals, Turi 2005, Oxford, Nyikos, Crocall 1987, Wen, Johnson 1997)
Teacher expectations
• Studies show that teacher expectations pronounced through teaching methods and
examining determine the choice of strategies (Oxford 1990, 1994).
Instruction of the learning strategies
• The results in this area are contradictory. May be because of methodological reasons.
The simpler the strategies used by the learner, the more difficult it is to re-train the
learner to use different ones (Brown et al. 1983).
29
Conclusion
• When learning a foreign language, strategy use is
unavoidable.
• Strategies on upper secondary comprehensive level in the
Czech Republic are used unsystematically and there is a spaceCzech Republic are used unsystematically and there is a space
for improvement. One of the reasons being the fact that 1/3
of the students admit not knowing how to learn.
• Results of the Czech Republic do not differ in basic aspect
from results from other countries. And the SILL inventory
might be used successfully in the Czech Republic.
30
Thank you
for your attention and questions
31
Katerina Vlckova
Masaryk University - Brno - Czech Republic
vlckova@ped.muni.cz