(1) how learners approach learning, both in and out of classrooms, and (2) the kinds of strategies

1

CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION

I.1. Statement of the problem and rationale for the study

Along with the appearance of the Cognitive view of learning, which regards

language learning as a dynamic, creative process and the learners as active strategy

users and knowledge constructors, many researchers have shifted their focus of

attention from teaching methods to learners (Chamot, A.U. & O’Malley, J. M.,

1994).

Quite a large amount of research literature have paid attention to (1) how learners

approach learning, both in and out of classrooms, and (2) the kinds of strategies

and cognitive processing they use in second language acquisition (O’Malley, J. M.

& Chamot, A.U., 1995).

The first studies on “good language learner” were initiated by Rubin (1975) and

Stern (1975). Research results suggested that the “good language learner” might be

doing something special that we could all learn from. From these very first

initiatives, more and more researchers have come to recognize the significance of

special learner techniques or strategies in second language acquisition. Bialystock

(1978: 71) states in his study that learning strategies are “optimal means for

exploiting available information to improve competence in a second language”.

Therefore, language learning strategies are beneficial for those who hope to

improve his language skills in a better way. Oxford (1989) considers learning

strategies as one of the “most important variables influencing performance in a

second language” (p.238). His research findings also recommend that “better

strategies improve language performance.” (Oxford, 1989: 238)

2

In recent years, the study of learning strategies has seen an “explosion of activity”

(Skehan, 1991: 285 cited in Ellis, 1999:529). In discussing the nature and

significance of learning strategies, researchers have affirmed that “research

findings on learner strategies can be used as a basis for planning more effective

instructional practice” (O’Malley& Chamot, 1995:viii). Lessard-Clouston (1997:3)

also agreed that language learning strategies “contribute to the development of the

communicative competence of the students”. They are tools for active, self- directed

involvement needed for developing L2 communicative ability.

So far, the role of learning strategies and the effects of learner’s choice of learning

strategies on learning outcomes have been confirmed. Several studies have also

attempted to find out the relationship between language learning strategy choice and

other factors like age, gender, motivation, language learning experiences, etc.

Of the many individual learner differences (belief, affective states, learner factors,

learning experience) and situational and social factors (target language, setting,

task performed, gender) that determine learners’ choice of learning strategies,

gender has been recognized as “a profound” choice on strategy choice (Oxford &

Nyiko, 1989: 545). Swann (1992) also asserted that “gender differences may have

implications for Second language learning, teaching and assessment” (cited in Ah

Shehadah, 1999: 256).

However, the body of research on the relationship between gender differences and

language learning strategies is still quite limited. Studies that are applicable to

Vietnamese situation are even harder to find. This research was, therefore, carried

out with the hope of providing an insight into the relationship. However, due to the

limited time and scope of the study, the researcher only chose to work with a small

sample of 72 English learners. Through the process of carrying out the research

study, we hope to find the answers to the following questions:

3

Research questions:

What are the EFL learning strategies employed by the students?

Is there a significant difference in the frequency of EFL learning strategy

used by the male and female students?

Together with answering these two questions, the researcher hopes to find out some

implications for teachers in order to better support students of both genders in their

study.

I.2. Aims and objectives of the study

To find out common strategies used by a group of –EFL learners in Hanoi,

Vietnam

To determine if male and female students use similar language learning

strategies

To find out how teachers can help both male and female students use their

learning strategies effectively

I.3. Scope of study

Concerning the types of strategies:

The intent of data collection is to obtain information on all types of strategies. The

researcher does not choose to focus on one specific category of strategy

(metacognitive strategies, cognitive strategies, etc.) or on a specific strategy (self￾monitoring, etc.)

4

Concerning the focus on language skills

In fact, the focus of research on learning strategies might be on all four language

skills (listening, speaking, reading and writing) or on one or more language

modalities (listening, speaking, reading, writing or some combination of these).

However, in this research, we chose to focus on all the four skills because many of

the language learning tasks and activities are crossed modalities. Respondents were

asked to describe their strategies in general in second language acquisition. Only

gender differences in language learning strategies were taken into consideration.

Target population

The research will be carried out on 72 second year students at a university in Hanoi.

Of these 72 students, there are 27 male students and 45 females. They are from 19

to 21 years of age. Most of them have studied English for at least five years (3 years

at upper- secondary school and 2 years at university). These students are confident,

dynamic, and lively. They have high motivation for their study.

I.4. Methods of study

Questionnaires

In this research, Oxford’s Strategy Inventory for Language Learning (SILL)-

version 7.0 (Oxford, 1990) was chosen to investigate learners’ use of learning

strategies. This particular framework was adopted for its comprehensiveness and

high reliability (Oxford, 1996a). A questionnaire consisting of 50 statements was

designed based on Oxford’s framework to measure students’ level of English

learning strategy use. The items were grouped according to the six categories in

Oxford's (1990) strategy classification systems: (a) memory strategies, (b) cognitive

5

strategies, (c) comprehension strategies, (d) metacognitive strategies, (e) affective

strategies, and (f) social strategies.

Students responded individually on a 1 to 5 scale. For each statement, they had to

decide whether the statement is (1)“Never true of me”; (2)“Usually not true of

me”, (3) “Somewhat true of me”, (4) “Usually true of me” or (5) “Always true of

me”.

The whole set of questionnaire was translated into Vietnamese, piloted and

carefully edited before being delivered to the students.

Informal Interviews

Researchers have suggested that students are “more motivated to response in an

interview because they are pleased to have someone take a personal interest in their

learning processes” (O’Malley & Chamot, 1995: 94). In this research, informal

interview was carried out after the questionnaires had been collected, data from

questionnaires had been processed and the researcher had got an overall picture of

the situation. The core purpose of the interview was to get more insights into the

issue, elaborate on students’ answers in the questionnaires and clarify some

prominent points.

I.5. Overview of the rest of the paper

The research study is divided into four main chapters. Chapter one: review the

literature concerning gender differences in language learning, language learning

strategies, as well as gender differences in language learning strategies and give

rationale for the study. Chapter two describes and justifies the research methods,

participants, as well as the methods of data collection and analysis. Chapter three is

devoted to analyzing and discussing the data collected. Finally, in the last chapter-

6

chapter four, some recommendations are offered concerning how knowledge of

language learning strategies in general and gender differences in language learning

in particular can facilitate teachers in helping students become better strategy users

and more independent learners.

7

CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW

II.1. Overview about gender differences in language learning

II.1.1. Gender differences in L1 learning

In the field of language-learning research, the question of gender differences is the

one that has received relatively little attention. This is partly because it is taken as

an established fact that girls are superior to boys in language ability. The differences

are purported to stem from biological distinctions in the lateralization of function

between the hemispheres of the brain (McGlone, 1980).

This is supported by the study of neuroscientists from Georgetown University

Medical Center. As for them, boys and girls use different parts of their brains to

process some basic aspects of grammar. Their study suggests that girls mainly use a

system that is based around memorizing words and associations between them,

whereas boys rely primarily on a system that governs the rules of language

(Meville, 2006). This study also confirms that differences between males and

females may be an important factor in these cognitive processes.

Mccoby and Jacklin (1974) also conclude that by adolescence, girls are better in

both receptive and productive verbal tasks and in both higher-level tasks (verbal

analogies, comprehension of difficult material, creative writing) and lower-level

tasks (fluency measures, like producing as many words as possible ending in ion).

Moreover, socially speaking, it is supposed that teachers, who think girls are better

than boys in language, will spend more time on it with the girls, and the girls will

probably live up to the teachers’ expectations (Wang, 2006). However, this

position has occasionally been challenged.

8

II.1.2. Gender difference in L2 learning

Several studies have discussed gender differences in L2 learning. First of all, a

number of studies based on self-report learning (Bacon, 1992; Ehrman & Oxford,

1989; Zoubir-Shaw & Oxford, 1995) have suggested that males and females

demonstrated different preference for knowing or guessing the meaning of words

in context. Zoubir-Shaw and Oxford (1995) found that males reported more often

than females that “not knowing the meaning of a word impeded their thinking

process or their progress” (cited in Wang, 2006: 10). Females, however, reported

using significantly more compensation strategies, such as guessing and learning

from context, than the males did.

Bacon’s (1992) study investigates the strategies that learners use when listening to

authentic L2 texts of two levels of difficulty. She found that, though all learners

reported made some reference to English translation while listening to both L2

texts, men reported doing so were of a larger number than women, especially with

the more difficult passage. The male participants’ self-reports of the strategies they

used included the following: “Basically, I tried to translate as much Spanish into

English as possible,” and “I have a dictionary in my head. When I hear a word, I

leaf through my head really fast to see if I can find out what it means in English”

(cited in Wang, 2006: 11). Women investigated, by contrast, used such top-down

strategies as inferring or guessing the meaning from context and bypassing English,

no matter how difficult they found the passage.

In general, whether the differences are biological or the product of socialization,

findings in L2 learning support the notion that there are differences in how males

and females learn a L2.