Methodology in Language Learning: Quality of Learning

 


Language learning strategies have traditionally been included in the taxonomy of individual differences. After all, language learning strategies constitute an aspect of the learning process rather than being learner attributes proper. Learning processes which are consciously selected by the learner, and it is also reflected in virtually all other definitions of the concept which equate learning strategies with the learners’ actions/behaviors and thoughts aiming at facilitating learning. And let’s face it: actions and thoughts are not individual differences.

At this point we could conclude just saying that the notion of learner strategy is irrelevant to the general theme of this book. However, it is worth digging a bit further before we draw our conclusion, because, as we will see, learning strategies are immensely ambiguous phenomena and nothing is clear-cut about them. Learning styles and learning strategies are interrelated concepts, differing primarily in their breadth and stability, with a style being a “strategy used consistently across a class of tasks”.

It has also been widely observed that some school children are more inclined to use learning strategies than others: In a seminal paper on self-regulated learning, portrayed these learners as students “calling on a library of information and applying a suite of varied skills during studying activities in which achievements are forged”. The good language learner cannot be described in terms of a single set of strategies but rather through the ability to understand and develop a personal set of effective strategies.

Learning strategies include any thoughts, behaviors, beliefs, or emotions that facilitate the acquisition, understanding, or later transfer of new knowledge and skills. Although these definitions appear to be logical and exhaustive, they leave several issues open. The most fundamental one is this: What exactly is the difference between engaging in an ordinary learning activity and a strategic learning activity? That is, what is the difference between the processes of learning and learning strategy use? For example, if someone memorizes vocabulary by simply looking at a bilingual vocabulary list, most people would say that this is an example of learning. But if the person applies some color marking code to highlight the words in the list which he or she still does not know, suddenly we can start talking about strategic learning. But what is the difference? The color code?

Language learning strategies include strategies for identifying the material that needs to be learned, distinguishing it from other material if need be, grouping it for easier learning (e.g., grouping vocabulary by category into nouns, verbs, adjectives, adverbs, and so forth), having repeated contact with the material (e.g., through classroom tasks or the completion of homework assignments), and formally committing the material to memory when it does not seem to be acquired naturally (whether through rote memory techniques such as repetition, the use of mnemonics, or some other memory technique). Although this definition is refreshing in its concreteness, it does not help us to distinguish normal learning behaviors and strategic learning behaviors: all the processes mentioned can also apply to ‘ordinary’ learning without any strategic element.

So what are the distinguishing features of learning strategies?

There are three critical characteristics:

·       goal-directed,

·       intentionally invoked,  

·       effortful. The problem with these intuitively appealing attributes is that they can also be true about hard and focused learning in general.

An interesting practice-related avenue to pursue is whether what we mean by effort when doing a language task simply means the effective deployment of a range of strategies in a task. However, if we define the strategic quality of learning with goal-oriented, intentionally evoked, and effortful behavior then we, in effect, equate ‘strategic’ with ‘motivated,’ because goal-oriented, intentionally evoked, and effortful are three key features of motivation.

Although this is clearly important in distinguishing learning strategies from creative teacher owned tasks that the learner engages in, choice is still not enough to distinguish strategies from non-strategies because students tend to make several choices concerning their learning process that are not strategic in the strict sense, that is, which do not necessarily involve appropriate and purposeful behavior to enhance the effectiveness of learning. Examples of such behavior include choosing the time to do home assignments; selecting a pen for doing a writing task; choosing a partner whom one likes for pair work; performing a classroom task in a way that it will impress one’s girlfriend or boyfriend, and so on—the point is that while these acts can be strategic, the learner can also engage in them without necessarily wanting to improve the effectiveness of his/her learning.

Accordingly, learners engage in strategic learning if they exert purposeful effort to select and then pursue learning procedures that they believe will increase their individual learning effectiveness. The same idea has been expressed more technically, from an information-processing perspective. This approach of defining strategies in terms of appropriateness appears to be simple but comprehensive. It does, however, raise two new problems: First, the term ‘appropriate’ is rather fluid and it is not easy to imagine how it can be operationalized in an actual research design. Second, and more importantly, learning strategies conceptualized in this vein can only be defined relative to a particular agent, because a specific learning technique may be strategic for one and non-strategic for another depending on the person’s IF condition and how the specific tactic or strategy offers a personally effective response to that.

In summary, at this stage of our discussion we cannot offer a watertight definition of ‘learning strategies.’ As it is considered this issue further in a later section and describe how scholars in educational psychology have gone around the definition problem without giving up the essence of strategic learning. First, however, we take a diachronic view of how the study of language learning strategies evolved in the past and what characterizes the field today.

©

 

University of Oxford - post gradual studies 2009 'English Language Teaching'

 

Bibliography:

1)  Blundell, Lesley and Stokes, Jackie, Task listening, Cambridge University Press, 198r.

2)  Gore, Lesley, Listening to Maggie, Longman, 1979.

3)  McClintock, John and Stern, Borje, Let's listen, Heinemann Educational Books, 1974.

4)  Maley, Alan and Moulding, Sandra, Learning to listen, CambridgeUniversity Press, 198 I.

5)  Scott, Wendy, Are you listening?, Oxford University Press, 1980.

6)  Stokes, Jacqueline StClair, Elementary task listening, CambridgeUniversity Press, 1984.

7)  Underwood, Mary and Barr, Pauline, Listeners (series), Oxford University Press, 1980.

8)  Abbs, Brian and Jones, T., Cloudsongs, Longman, 1977.

9)  Abbs, Brian and York, N., Skyhigh, Longman, 1975.

10)         Jones, Christopher, Back home, Longman, 1980.

11)         Kingsbury, Roy, and O'Shea, Patrick, Seasons and people and other songs,Oxford University Press, 1979.

12)         Wilson, Ken, Mister Monday and other songs for the teaching of English,Longman, 197r.

 

13)         Wilson, Ken and Morrow, Keith, Goodbye rainbow, Longman, 1974. 

14)         Seidl, Jennifer and McMordie, W., English idioms and how to use them, Oxford University Press, 1978.

15)         Wilson, F. P. (ed. ), Oxford Dictionary of English Proverbs, Oxford University Press, 1970.

16)         Brown, Gillian, Listening to spoken English, Longman, 1977.

17)         Brown, Gillian, 'Understanding spoken language', TESOL Quarterly 12:2, 1978.

18)         Brown, Gillian and Yule, George, Teaching the spoken language, Cambridge University Press, 1983.

19)         Byrne, Donn, 'Listening comprehension', Teaching oral English, Longman, 1976.

20)         Crystal, David and Davy, Derek, Investigating English style, Longman, 1969:

21)         Curfs, Emile, 'Listening deserves better', Modern English Teacher 9:3, 1982.

22)         Geddes, Marion, 'Listening', inK. Johnson and K. Morrow (eds. ),

23)         Communication in the classroom, Longman, 1981. Geddes, Marion and White, Ron, 'The use of semi-scripted simulated authentic speech and listening comprehension', Audio-visual Language journal, 1978.

24)         Littlewood, William, Communicative language teaching, Cambridge University Press, 198 I.

25)         Maley, Alan, 'The teaching of listening comprehension skills', Modern English Teacher, 1978.

26)         Porter, Don and Roberts, Jon, 'Authentic listening activities', English Language Teaching]ournal, 1981.

27)         Richards, Jack C., 'Listening comprehension', TESOL Quarterly, 1983.

28)         Rivers, Wilga, 'Hearing and comprehending', Teaching foreign language skills (revised edn.), University of Chicago Press, 1980. Widdowson, Henry, Teaching language as communication, Oxford University Press, 1978. The teaching of listening comprehension, British Council, E.L. T. Documents Special, 1981

Komentarze

Popularne posty z tego bloga

Dark Side: Some Kind of Justice From Behind The Grave

Methodology in Language Learning: The Ehrman & Leaver Construct

Under the Microscope: The Formation of Adipocere