Methodology in Language Learning: Actions, Behaviors, Steps, or Techniques

 

Definitions of learning strategies do not come any better than this, as attested to by the fact that a recent definition from educational psychology by one of the most influential American strategy experts, Claire Weinstein says “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. The problem with these intuitively appealing attributes is that they can also be true about hard and focused learning in general. Does that mean that hard and focused learning is by definition strategic? 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. It is an essential feature of these strategies that they are voluntarily employed by the learner. 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. 

An activity becomes strategic when it is particularly appropriate for the individual learner, in contrast to general learning activities which a student may find less helpful. 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 which are distinguished between tactics and strategies. A strategy is a broader design or plan for approaching a high-level goal and it coordinates a set of tactics. It was proven that the actual student response only becomes strategic if it matches the IF condition in the pursuit of a goal, that is, if it is appropriate for the particular purpose. 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.

A given learning strategy is neither good nor bad; it is essentially neutral until it is considered in context. A strategy is useful under these conditions:

·       the strategy relates well to the L2 task at hand;

·       the strategy fits the particular student’s learning style preferences to one degree or another;

·       the student employs the strategy effectively and links it with other relevant strategies;

 

This relativity is not necessarily a problem but it does go against the standard view in the field; for example, this conception would disqualify several learning strategy inventories which start out with a list of preconceived strategies and learners are asked about the extent of their use of these; if a specific learner behavior only becomes a strategy when a learner endorses it as personally relevant and appropriate, such questionnaire items do not make much sense as they usually posit a rating scale ranging from ‘not used or endorsed’ at one end, which does not apply to strategies conceived in this way.

 

©

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