The Strategy Factor in Successful Language Learning: The Tornado Effect: 121 - Brossura

Griffiths, Carol

Brossura

ISBN 10: 1783099739 ISBN 13: 9781783099733

Casa editrice: Multilingual Matters Ltd, 2018

Riassunto

This book addresses fundamental questions regarding the relationships between successful language learning and strategy use and development, according to learner, situational or target variables. It considers strategy effectiveness from an individual point of view and discusses pedagogical issues, especially relating to teacher perceptions and training, classroom and learner factors, methodology and content. This new edition has been reworked and revised to include an extensive review, analysis and re-interpretation of the existing literature and an update on the theoretical debate surrounding language learning strategies. The research methodology section has been considerably extended and detailed explanations are now given for how to analyse data from research studies. Rather than focusing on strategies divorced from the 'real world' of the classroom, this book explores the issues from the teaching/learning point of view and will be of interest to students, teachers, trainee teachers, teacher educators and researchers alike.

Su questo libro

Informazioni sugli autori

Carol Griffiths has many years' experience as teacher, manager and teacher trainer in the field of English Language Teaching. She completed a PhD researching language learning strategies at the University of Auckland, New Zealand, and learner issues continue to be her main research interest. Carol has most recently worked in Istanbul, Turkey, having previously worked in New Zealand, Indonesia, Japan, China, North Korea and the UK.

Carol Griffiths has many years' experience as teacher, manager and teacher trainer in the field of English Language Teaching. She completed a PhD researching language learning strategies at the University of Auckland, New Zealand, and learner issues continue to be her main research interest. Carol has most recently worked in Istanbul, Turkey, having previously worked in New Zealand, Indonesia, Japan, China, North Korea and the UK.

Estratto. © Ristampato con autorizzazione. Tutti i diritti riservati.

The Strategy Factor in Successful Language Learning

The Tornado Effect

By Carol Griffiths

Multilingual Matters

Copyright © 2018 Carol Griffiths
All rights reserved.

ISBN: 978-1-78309-973-3

Contents

Acknowledgements, vii, 
Introduction, ix, 
1 A Conceptual Perspective, 1, 
2 A Quantitative Perspective, 90, 
3 A Qualitative Perspective, 125, 
4 A Pedagogical Perspective, 162, 
5 Conclusion, 207, 
Appendix 1: Language Skills Development Strategy Questionnaire, 212, 
Appendix 2: English Language Learning Strategy Inventory (ELLSI), 215, 
Appendix 3: Interview Guide, 216, 
Appendix 4: The English Language Development Strategy Inventory (ELLSI – Teachers' Version), 217, 
Appendix 5: Target Language Learning Strategy Inventory (TaLLSI) –, 2016, 
Glossary, 221, 
References, 235, 
Index, 261, 

CHAPTER 1

A Conceptual Perspective

There is an old proverb which states: 'Give a man a fish and he eats for a day. Teach him how to fish and he eats for a lifetime'. Applied to the language field, this proverb might be interpreted to mean that if students are provided with answers, the immediate problem is solved. But if they are taught the strategies to work out the answers for themselves, they may be empowered to manage their own language development. It is this fundamental premise on which this book is based.

Over the years, a great deal of effort has gone into developing theories, methods and approaches for teaching language (such as the Grammar Translation Method, Audiolingualism and the Communicative Approach). However, for many years, issues relating to the learner were treated with 'relative neglect' (Dansereau, 1978: 78) and much less attention was paid to the language development process from the learner's point of view (Tarone & Yule, 1989). Although valuable work was done on questions of how language is acquired/learnt/developed (for instance, Eckman et al., 1984; Ellis, 1986; Krashen, 1981; Winitz, 1981), when it is considered that the learner forms one half of the teacher/learner partnership, it might be considered surprising that, in general, the significance of the learner's role was so long 'underestimated' (Larsen-Freeman, 2001: 12).

In more recent years, however, the learner perspective has received much more attention, an early example of this trend being Nunan's (1988) The Learner-Centred Curriculum. Indeed, we might suggest that the learner-focused perspective had begun in the 1970s, when the possibility that success in language development might be related to how students go about the task was explored by writers such as Rubin (1975), Stern (1975), Hosenfeld (1976) and Naiman et al. (1978). Writers such as O'Malley (1987), Oxford (1990, 2011), Wenden (1991), Cohen (1998, 2011), Chamot (2001, 2008), Harris (2001), Macaro (2006), Gu (2012) and Griffiths (2008b, 2013) have continued to suggest that learners might be able to develop language more effectively by the use of strategies, which have the potential to be 'an extremely powerful learning tool' (O'Malley et al., 1985: 43). O'Malley et al. noted, however, that there was 'no consensus' (1985: 22) regarding basic concepts such as terminology, definition, classification and underpinning theory, which was creating 'confusion' (1985: 22) and impeding research. Although this was written more than 30 years ago, 'differences of opinion still exist' (Oxford, 2017: 51). This book hopes to contribute to furthering the cause of consensus in the interests of promoting more productive research.

1.1 Terminology

Some of this ambiguity arises at the very basic level of terminology. This applies especially to the language development tool phenomenon itself, to the language being developed, to the learning/acquisition/ development distinction and to those who are trying to develop a new language.

Strategy

Although promising in terms of its potential to facilitate successful language development, there has been 'considerable confusion' (O'Malley et al., 1985: 22) in the strategy field; indeed there has been a great deal of controversy over the very term strategy itself, before we even begin to think about definition, classification and theory. Consensus is not assisted by some writers' use of conflicting terminology such as learning behaviours (Politzer, 1983; Politzer & McGroarty, 1985; Wesche, 1977), tactics (Seliger, 1984) and techniques (Stern, 1992). These rival terms are often used more or less (but not always exactly) synonymously with the term strategy as used elsewhere in the literature.

Strategy, of course, is originally a military term, as some (for instance, Larsen-Freeman & Long, 1991; Oxford, 1990, 2011a) point out, and there are those who find the somewhat bellicose overtones of the term unfortunate. A military strategy tends to be an overall plan of attack or 'plans for winning a war' (Oxford, 2011b: 168); the term tactics tends to be applied to smaller manoeuvres within the overall strategy. Perhaps, however, we do not need to concern ourselves too much with the way the term was used in battle when we are applying it to language development, although it is an interesting comparison!

According to Larsen-Freeman and Long (1991: 199), the term strategy was used by Rubin (1975) 'in perhaps the earliest study in this area and it enjoys the widest currency today' (for instance, among many others, chamot, 1987; Cohen, 1991, 2011; Cohen & Macaro, 2007; Harris, 2001; Lam & Wong, 2000; O'Neil, 1978; Oxford, 1990, 2011a; Pearson, 1988; Purpura, 1999; Wenden, 1985; Weinstein, 1978). It is acknowledged, however, that strategy is not the only term which has been, or which might be, used to cover the behaviours involved.

Although the term tactics is employed by some writers to denote a specific activity within an overall strategy (for instance, Oxford, 2011a), the point at which a given behaviour ceases to be a tactic and becomes a strategy or vice versa is not entirely easy to pinpoint. Is an action such as asking a more knowledgeable classmate for help with words I don't understand, for instance, a tactic or a strategy? If it is considered a tactic within, say, a broader strategy such as using resources, what then would writing down the classmate's explanation become – a subtactic? And what about repeating it to myself to remember what I have written down? In view of its well-established use in the field, and the difficulty of determining the boundaries between layers of activity if other terms are introduced, the term strategy, as defined in Section 1.2, will be used throughout this book in preference to alternative terms.

Target language (TL)

No less controversial than the term strategy itself is the term for the language the strategies are being used to develop. Many writers opt for the term second language (SL or L2) (for instance, among many others, Ausubel, 1964; Chaudron, 1995; Cook, 1991; Donato, 2000; Harley et al., 1990; Hylenstam & Pienemann, 1985; Krashen, 1982; Phillipson et al., 1991; Schumann, 1978; Sharwood Smith, 1994; Spolsky, 1989; Wolfson & Judd, 1983), even though it may be used 'somewhat confusingly' (Ellis, 1994: 12). The term is confusing because it does not allow for the many students who may already be multilingual and who may be in the process of developing a third, fourth or subsequent language, and therefore it does not reflect or acknowledge the resource that learners may already possess. There is also frequently confusion between the terms second language (SL) (studied in the environment where the language is spoken, for instance international students studying English in New Zealand or USA), foreign language (FL) (studied in an environment other than where it is spoken, for instance French as it is taught in England or Turkey) and heritage language (the language derived from a particular cultural heritage spoken in a dominant language environment, for instance Hebrew as spoken in USA).

Other terms such as non-native language (NNL) and non-primary language (NPL), where native and primary are usually defined as the one spoken in the home, are not always as straightforward as might initially be supposed, since many homes and backgrounds around the world operate in more than one language. Still other terms which have been suggested, such as additional language or additive language, tend to make the language sound either marginalized or like a brand of food or petrol! In the face of these debates, the term used in this book will be target language (TL) – the one the students are aiming to develop.

Acquisition/learning/development

The acquisition/learning distinction was introduced to the literature by Krashen (1976, 1981), according to whom acquisition occurs where language is absorbed in naturalistic settings (such as children in the home, or students in immersion environments); learning, on the other hand, occurs in more formal settings (such as somewhat older students in a classroom), and tends to involve purposeful effort to internalize language items, rules, and/or skills. In fact, the two terms are often used more-or-less interchangeably in the literature. A degree of confusion exists, however, between those who continue to make this distinction and those who use acquisition as the umbrella term (e.g. Ellis, 1986, 1994, 2008; VanPatten & Williams, 2015).

There are others, however, who use the alternative term development (e.g. De Bot, 2008; Larsen-Freeman & Cameron, 2008; Lantolf et al., 2015; Mackey & Philp, 1998). Since this term avoids the acquisition/learning controversy, the term development will be favoured throughout this book. However, since strategy research and literature has tended more commonly to involve those trying to develop a language other than the first by means of a purposeful choice of activities (in other words, what Krashen would have called learning), and since this kind of activity is mostly what this book is about, learning (and, therefore, learners) will also be used.

Speakers of other languages (SOL)

Yet another controversial term is that used for those who are trying to develop a target language. The term SOL (speakers of other languages), as favoured by publications such as TESOL Quarterly, TESOL Matters and TESOLANZ Journal, although somewhat long and clumsy, has arisen partly to avoid the second/foreign language confusion. Descriptors such as non-native, non-primary and non-English-speaking-background (NESB) have been used, but the intrinsically negative perspective of these terms make them less than universally approved.

Unfortunately, the universally acceptable term for those who already speak other languages and are trying to develop a new one has yet to be coined. For the purposes of the present work, however, the term speakers of other languages (SOL) will be used.

1.2 Definition

Strategies for developing language have been notoriously difficult to define (for instance, Oxford, 1990; Oxford & Cohen, 1992). One of the earliest researchers in this field, Rubin (1975) provided a very broad definition of learning strategies as 'the techniques or devices which a learner may use to acquire knowledge' (Rubin, 1975: 43). By means of observing students in classrooms, observing herself, talking to good language learners and eliciting observations from teachers, Rubin isolated seven strategies characteristic of good language learners, namely:

• guessing/inferring (by using clues);

• communicating (for instance, by means of circumlocution, gestures etc.);

• managing inhibitions (for instance, of appearing foolish);

• attending to form (for instance, by looking for patterns);

• practising (for instance, pronunciation);

• monitoring one's own and the speech of others;

• attending to meaning (for instance, by noticing context).

At around the same time as Rubin published her 'good learner' study, Stern (1975) produced a list of ten language learning strategies used by good language learners. He believed that good language learners are characterized by positive learning strategies, among which he included:

• experimenting;

• planning;

• developing the new language into an ordered system;

• revising progressively;

• searching for meaning;

• practising;

• using the language in real communication;

• self-monitoring;

• developing the target language into a separate reference system;

• learning to think in the target language.

Although Stern's work was an important addition to the developing body of research on the relationship between language learning strategies and the successful language learner, these strategies were listed in a rather confused mixture with 'characteristics', such as 'active', 'tolerant', 'outgoing' (Stern, 1975: 316).

In another pioneering piece of research at around the same time, Naiman and his colleagues (1978) also tried to find out what people known to be good at languages had in common. Identified as 'essential for successful language learning' (Naiman et al., 1978: 225) were strategies for:

• coming to grips with the language as a system;

• using the language in real communication;

• monitoring the interlanguage;

• coming to terms with the affective demands of language learning;

• coping with ambiguity.

As we can see, there is little agreement among these three important early studies, causing O'Malley et al. (1985: 22) to lament: 'there is no consensus on what constitutes a learning strategy in second language learning'. Subsequently, Wenden and Rubin (1987) talk of 'the elusive nature of the term' (1987: 7), Ellis (1994) describes the concept as 'fuzzy' (1994: 529), while Cohen (1998) talks of 'conflicting views' (1998: 3). Ellis (1985) compares the task of defining strategies to stumbling blindfold round a room trying to find a hidden object, or trying to work out the classification system of a whole library when you only have one or two books to go on. As Grenfell and Harris (1999) put it, 'it is not a straight-forward matter to get inside the "black box" of the human brain and see what is going on' (1999: 36–37).

My own personal simile for this undertaking is to compare it to trying to get an octopus into a box: you no sooner think you have got it all neatly and tidily tucked away than you find some bit of it has wriggled out without you noticing and is threatening to sabotage the whole endeavour.

Difficulties such as those noted above led Macaro (2006) to opt against 'offering an all-encompassing definition' (2006: 320) in favour of identifying 'a series of features essential to describing a strategy' (2006: 320). These features included:

• location;

• size;

• abstractness;

• relationship to other strategies;

• explicitness of goal orientation;

• transferability.

Gu (2012) also concludes that language learning strategy 'is not a clearly definable concept' (2012: 330), and he argues instead for a 'prototypical core and dimensions of variation' (2012: 330). According to Gu (2012), 'the prototypical core of a strategy is a dynamic process with problem solving as its central aim' (2012: 330).

Meanwhile, Dornyei and Skehan (2003: 610) had gone even further and advised abandoning the strategy concept altogether in the face of a 'theoretical muddle' which had never been 'cleared away'. They recommended the adoption of the 'more versatile' concept of self-regulation, which 'refers to the degree to which individuals are active participants in their own learning' (Dornyei & Skehan, 2003: 611). Others also (e.g. Boekaerts et al., 2000; Brown, 2009; Brown & White, 2010; Kormos & Csizer, 2013; Moyer, 2014; Oxford, 2011a; Ranalli, 2012; Tseng et al., 2006; Zimmerman & Schunk, 2011), took up the self-regulation idea, prompting Gao (2007) to ask the somewhat desperate question: 'Has language learning strategy research come to an end?' (2007: 615).

Winne (1995: 173), however, included strategies as one of the means used by learners to self-regulate, arguing that 'more eff ective learners are self-regulating'; however, he also makes the point that self-regulating learners make 'strategic plans for studying'. Viewed this way, rather than being replaced by the self-regulation concept, strategies become a tool, pro-actively employed by learners in the process of regulating their own learning.

Rose (2012: 92) also advises against 'throwing language learning strategies out with the bathwater', since, although there may be some 'defi nitional fuzziness' in relation to strategies, the self- regulation concept is no less 'fuzzy' (a point also acknowledged by Dörnyei & Ryan, 2015). Rose suggests that 'movements towards self-regulation are not incompatible with language learning strategies. That is, it is possible to examine strategic learning both in terms of a learner's self-regulation of the learning task, but also in terms of the cognitive and behavioural strategies they employ' (2015: 97).

(Continues...)

Excerpted from The Strategy Factor in Successful Language Learning by Carol Griffiths. Copyright © 2018 Carol Griffiths. Excerpted by permission of Multilingual Matters.
All rights reserved. No part of this excerpt may be reproduced or reprinted without permission in writing from the publisher.
Excerpts are provided by Dial-A-Book Inc. solely for the personal use of visitors to this web site.

Dettagli dell'edizione

• Editore: Multilingual Matters Ltd
• Data di pubblicazione: 2018
• Lingua: Inglese
• ISBN 10: 1783099739
• ISBN 13: 9781783099733
• Rilegatura: Copertina flessibile
• Numero edizione: 2
• Numero di pagine: 263
• Contatto del produttore: non disponibile
• Persona responsabile: gpsr@libri.de; gpsr@libri.de; ; Friedensallee 273; Hamburg; 22763; Germania