TEACHING HOW TO LEARN: THE IMPACT OF STRATEGY TRAINING ON IRANIAN EFL LEARNERS’ LEARNING PROCESS
Hamed Barjesteh
Islamic
ha_bar77@yahoo.com
Abstract
Recent research on cognition has indicated the importance of learning strategies in gaining command over L2 skills. Theses researches have quantitavely measured improvements in learners’ test scores following the completion of a strategy training programme. The present research reports a personal experience to investigate the impact of strategy training on Iranian EFL learners’ learning process in a reading comprehension strategies programme: detecting probable changes in the learners’ behavior, investigating their internal learning process, probing strategy-specific changes in the learners’ approach to foreign language study and particularly identifying their attitudes towards foreign language learning. 64 Farsi-speaking undergraduate students majoring in EFL at
Key words: Language learning strategies, Strategy training, attitudes, Reading comprehension strategies, working Journal
Introduction
Research and theory in second language learning strongly suggest that good language learners use a variety of strategies to assist them in gaining command over new language skills. Leaning strategies are operations or steps used by a learner to facilitate the acquisition, storage, or retrieval of information (Rigney 1978, Dansereau in press). The learning strategies of good language learners, once identified and successfully taught to less competent learners, could have considerable potential for enhancing the development of second language skills. Second language teachers can play an active and valuable role by teaching students how to apply learning strategies to varied language activities and how to extend the strategies to new tasks both in the language class and in content areas requiring language skills (O’Malley et.al. 1985).
Assessing the need for strategy training, Cohen notes that ‘the ultimate goal for strategy training is to empower students by allowing them to take control of the language learning process’ (1998:70). He thus outlines three major objectives of strategy training: to develop the learners’ own individualized strategy system, to promote learner autonomy and learner self-direction and self-evaluation, and to encourage learners to take more responsibility for their own language learning. As these objectives focus on the process and not the end product of learning, FL educators need effective, process-oriented, qualitative measures for examining the success of strategy training. This article first provides an overview and critique of existing strategy training evaluation methods, and their presents results of the study which point out possible alternative ways of evaluation.
The study of FL strategy training programme evaluation is concerned with the question of how the outcome of learner training is measured (Wenden 1987: 162). As suggested by wenden, the changes in learner behavior during and after participating in a strategy programme can be investigated from the perspective of task improvement, strategy maintenance, and strategy transfer. Task improvement can be measured by assessing the learners’ performance in particular tasks, such as comprehension, grammar, vocabulary retention, etc. Strategy maintenance measures how long the learners retain a given strategy in their learning technique repertoire; for example, are they able to employ the strategy a week, a month, or a year after learning it? Strategy transfer evaluates the learners’ ability to generalize a strategy learnt in connection with specific task to other related tasks (Chen, 2007).
Relatively greater interest has been shown in quantitative data that measures learners’ task improvement. Only a small number of past studies have attempted to investigate the changes in learners’ behavior and learning process. McDonough (1995) notes this unbalance emphasis in existing research and observes that quantitative experiments evaluating task improvement provide only a partial picture. He argues that the improvement of learners’ language proficiency resulting directly from strategy training programmes is relatively weak, and can only be observed in certain kind of measures. Because strategy training aims at improving learning techniques and increasing the motivation to learn, its results are manifested in long-term changes in learners behaviors and attitudes towards FL study, rather than in rapid improvements in FL proficiency. Consequently, methods evaluating learners’ learning processes and attitudes are essential in strategy training programme assessment.
Others have also expressed dissatisfaction with strategy training evaluation research. Rees-Miller (1993) advocates longitudinal research to determine that relative effects of multiple variables, rather than focusing on a single variable or aspects of strategy training. This view is supported by Gu (1996), who criticizes work that examine exclusively the frequency of learners’ strategy use. Gu argues that this narrow focus is inadequate because it is a particular strategy’s appropriateness for a given context, rather than the frequency with which it is used, that results in successful learning. Chen (2007) argues that while quantitative data such as test results constitute a necessary component of strategy training evaluation, on their own they provide an incomplete picture. Quantitative data from sources such as self-reported application of strategies is needed to interpret the results of quantitative measures. As Weir and Roberts (1995:159) point out ‘they [quantitative data] can provide information on how teaching and learning processes actually take place and what they mean to participants’. This study thus adopts a qualitative methodology to examine students’ leaning processes in reading comprehension strategy programme. The aim is to discover potential ways of effective qualitative evaluation of strategy training.
Specifically, the study addressed the following research questions:
1) Does strategy training increase Iranian EFL learners’ motivation to read authentic materials?
2) How does the strategy training correspond with Iranian EFL learners’ opportunities to employ reading strategies?
3) To what extend does strategy training affect Iranian EFL learners’ reading strategy repertoire?
4) To what extend does the strategy training motivate Iranian EFL learners to read more attentively?
5) Does strategy training in the reading comprehension strategy programme enable Iranian EFL
learners to transfer the strategy to other tasks, i.e., speaking or listening?
6) Does strategy training improve Iranian EFL learners’ reading comprehension skill?
7) Is there any relationship between strategy training and Iranian EFL learners’ attitudes towards foreign language learning?
Method
Subjects
Persian-speaking undergraduate students majoring in English as a foreign language at university served as subjects. These students were taking reading courses in their second semester. All the subjects assigned to the study were from faculty of humanities with the age range of 21-25. Prior to the programme, the students took the secondary level English proficiency (SLEP) test. According to the scores fifty-six participants ranked as low intermediate on the reading comprehension section (30th-50th percentile), four ranked as high intermediate (50th-70th percentile), and four as advanced (70th percentile and higher).
Instrument
To collect the data, the ‘working journal’ designed by Chen (2007) used. The participants were encouraged to keep working journals every week during the training programme. Each page in the journal was divided vertically in two parts. On the left, students were asked to describe four reading tasks in which they engaged that week, two of which were assigned and two freely selected by the student. On the right, space was reserved for making notes while performing the task. As a classroom orientation, the students were given the following guideline:
You are asked to write your reaction to class events. What you found most/ least useful? Most/least enjoyable? Anything you want to remember to explore.
Write your comments about your learning progress, the use of strategies you were learning, your reflection and your feelings relating to the learning progress, or any other comments and observations. Write freely and in any form you wish. Don’t worry about spelling or Grammar correctness. I read for ideas only and no grades for that.
Following the completion of the programme, unstructured interviewed conducted with each participants to probe students’ thoughts while working on the strategy training. All interviews were recorded and transcribed.
Procedures
In order to probe the effectiveness of the programme, the researcher who was the programme’s instructor, presented the strategies in a direct and informed way. The progrmme lasted 13 sessions, with one and a half each. In each session, one or two target strategies were introduced and described, including a detailed explanation of how and why the strategy works. This was followed by strategy application practice and the students self-evaluation of their use of strategy. The strategies included in the training were: grasping the main idea, key word strategy, selective attention, using contextual clues, grouping, elaboration, self-monitoring, and imaging. The strategies were on the basis of O’Malley et.al. 1995
recommendation. Other strategies were mentioned and explained briefly, such as note taking, repeated reading, prediction, advance organizer, previewing, etc. The reading materials used in the classroom or as assignments for individual study included variety of authentic text from Readers Digest magazine and Active Reading.
Data Analysis
The quantitative data analysis methods in this study follow procedures suggested by Selinger and Shahomy (1989). The analysis aimed to identify patterns or categories according to the changes in the participants’ learning processes and behaviors. The data analysis process consisted of (1) combining two sources of data (working journals and interviews), (2) reviewing a portion of the data to derive preliminary patterns and categories, (3) refining the pattern and category groupings. Data analysis reliability was calculated with the formula proposed by Young (1997), with the following results: intercorder reliability of 0.84, intra-corder reliability 0.95.
Results
Data analysis led to a classification of the changes in the participants’ learning process into four dimensions, further subdivided into a total of seven categories. The dimensions and categories are listed below.
Dimensions of learning process and behavior changes:
• FL exposure (category 1,2)
• Information processing (category 3)
• Strategy repertoire and strategy transfer (category 4,5)
• Changes in reading comprehension and attitudes towards FL learning (category 6,7)
Category The impact on learners
1. materials motivating learners to read to more authentic materials
2. strategy practice expanding the opportunities to employ reading strategies
3. perceptual processing motivating learners to read more attentively and purposefully
4. strategy repertoire motivating learners to develop their own preferences in
choosing reading strategies
5. strategy transfer enabling learners to transfer reading strategies to writing or
speaking tasks
6. language proficiency improving the learners’ reading comprehension skills
7 . attitude change changing learners’ attitudes towards target FL learning
The following section discusses some representative examples from each category in more detail.
1. Materials: The strategy training programme increased some learners’ motivation to read to authentic materials more often and to choose materials of greater complexity. Other learners tried to apply the strategies to diverse text genres, or to materials of a more advanced language level.
Learner (S14-2-4)* writes:
“My main problem was my vocabulary knowledge. I was afraid to read in front of the class. I
preferred reading texts written by an Iranian writer because I found them easy to understand.
This class was the most enjoyable class I ever had. I enjoyed the relaxed atmosphere of this class.
Now I am not afraid to read because I can understand a text… Today, reading became so easy to
understand. I was so surprised that I can understand some newspapers and magazines. Next
week, I am going to read the Times and Newsweek”.
Encouraged by her achievements in reading comprehension, this learner try to apply the strategies she learnt to another genre of authentic materials, and also to use them in approaching texts of greater complexity. It appears that the strategy training program has motivated to the learner to proactively search for more difficult and complex materials.
2. Strategy Practice: Strategy training also created more opportunities for learners to practice the target strategies. This can be seen in the way learners compare their reading experience prior to and during the programme. Learners (S58, S32, S40-I) noted that they lacked awareness of reading strategies in the past, and that strategy training made a difference. Learner (S58-I-4) reports: “after finishing the training, I now pay more attention to strategies”. Learner (S32-I-4) notes: “it’s a new kind of learning to me… I didn’t know there were so many reading strategies that I could use”. Similarly, learner (S-40-I-3) recalls: “I was afraid to read. Now, I am using a method”. These accounts suggest a positive impact of strategy training on the learners L2/FL learning methods. Strategy training helps to draw students’ attention to the possibilities of using comprehension strategies in their learning.
3. Perceptual processing: a number of students felt that they had improved some aspects as a result of practicing the reading strategies. Learner (S28-2-2) reports:
“Learning these strategies is good. When I guess the meaning of words or a passage, I am more
organized. I used contextual clues. Although using strategies took me a lot of time while reading, I could get the main point of a passage at least. I mean ,compared with how I read before, I concentrated better”. Learner (S62-6-2) writes: “ It is useful because there is a plan, I can follow it.
4. Strategy repertoire: After a number of reading strategies were introduced, some learners expressed a preference for particular strategies. Learner (S40-I-2) emphasizes the importance of self-monitoring: “ I got distracted easily. My attention just drifted away easily. I should practice this more, monitoring myself. Very important.” Thus while the training programme introduced a variety of strategies, learners seem to be develop their own strategy repertoire and to prioritize strategies to for their particular ways of language input processing and their individual learning styles.
5. Strategy transfer: Some learners transferred the strategies they learnt for reading tasks to other language tasks such as writing or speaking. They made the transition from reading comprehension to other task formats despite the fact that this point was not made explicit by the instructor. Learner (S-54-I-3) reports his extension of strategy from reading comprehension to speaking and writing. “In reading sections, I would first scan the questions. I read the text then Isummarized the main ideas of in short. I read out the text several times. Finally, I reproduce the main idea of the passage orally in front of the class. At first, it was hard and I shied. But I used to speak as the class pass”. In this account, the learner elicited the strategy of advance organizer, selective attention, and key words in reading tasks. Similarly, learner (S-59-I-2) describes transferring the key word strategy to speaking tasks: “reading and summarizing was a useful method for speaking”.
6. Language proficiency: Some learners reported improvements in their English reading comprehension skills and credited the strategy training for their progress. For example, learner (S-43-I-2) describes how her perception of the speed of spoken English has changed, and sees this as an indication of an improvement of reading ability: “ I feel my English reading has improved…when I read a journal, I felt it was impossible to understand. But now, sometimes I feel they are easy”.
7. Attitude change. During and after the strategy training programme, some learners developed a liking for learning the target FL, while other maintained a negative attitude. For instance, a positive feeling towards learning English is expressed by learner (S48-8-I): “ I am coming to like the class! Thank you for encouraging us to learn by this way. I feel I’ve fallen in love with English… because of these techniques… reading English has become a habit for me”. By contrast, learner (S-21-I-3) expresses his negative view of English language learning: “I feel it’s not that I don’t like English, but English doesn’t like me”. The contrast between these perspectives may have resulted from differences in the two learners’ experience in the strategy learning programme. The data show that learners who had a satisfying experience in the
programme tended to develop relatively positive attitude towards EFL learning, while those whose experience was less satisfying tended to have negative attitudes. This indicates that a strategy training programme can shape learners’ perceptions of target language learning.
Discussion
The categories that emerged from the findings of this study support some of the observations made in the existing literature. For instance, strategy repertoire (motivating learners to develop their own preferences in choosing reading strategies) corresponds to one of the strategy training objectives proposed by Cohen (op.cit): to develop the learners’ own individualized strategy system. Language proficiency (improving the learners’ reading comprehension skills) is similar to Wenden’s task improvement. Strategy transfer (enabling learners to transfer reading strategies to speaking or writing tasks) corresponds to one of Wenden’s (op.cit.) methods of strategy training evaluation, namely, the learner’s ability to generalize strategies learnt in connection with specific tasks to other tasks. It is important to note that in addition to positive feedback, difficulties and frustrations in learning the target strategies were also reported by some participants at various points of the training programme. For example, one learner mentioned the difficulty in using the contextual clues strategy when working with some texts. The learning difficulty here appears to be related to the learning materials and the learner’s perceptual processing. Therefore, in order to make the strategy training effective, instructors have to attend to individual learning problems.
Conclusion
As the findings show, the present study contributes to the expansion of strategy training evaluation beyond quantitative test-score-based methods. The changes in learning processes, behaviors, attitudes, strategy use, and comprehension abilities are potential evaluation criteria to be considered. The impact of strategy training on the learner not only leads to improvement of language proficiency, but, more importantly engages with the dynamic internal changes in the learning processes. The categories described in this study may be a useful tool to help instructors identify the individual learners’ specific problems in strategy training. Thus, to provide a complete picture, evaluation methods need to be expanded in focus from measuring final results or achieved proficiency standard to aspects of qualitative and process centered assessment.
*Note
A numerical system is designed to identify each entry of data through learners ID, data source, time of data recorded, and the account number. ‘S12-3-5’ indicates that the learner (ID: 12) wrote in the third session with the account number five. In (S-21-I-3), I represent interview.
References
Cohen, A.D. (1998). Strategies in Learning and using Second Language.
Chen,Y. (2007). Learning to Learn: the Impact of Strategy Training. ELT,61(1),20-29
Dansereau, D.F., & Larson, C. (1983). Cooperative learning: the role of individual differences. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association,
Gu, P.Y. (1996). Robin Hood in
McDonough, S.H. (1995). Strategy and skill in learning a foreign language.
O’Malley, J.M., Chamot, U., StewnerManzanares, G., Russo, R., and Kupper, L. (1995). Learning strategy applications with students of English as a second language. TESOL Quarterly, 19(3),285-96.
O’Malley, J.M., Chamot, U., StewnerManzanares, G., Russo, R., and Kupper, L. (1985). Language learning strategies used by beginning and intermediate ESL students. Language learning, 35(1), 21-46.
Rees-Miller, J. (1993). A critical appraisal of learner training: theoretical bases and Teaching. TESOL Quarterly, 27(4), 679-89.
Rigney, J.W. (1978). Learning Strategies: A Theoretical Perspective in Learning
Strategies, Harold, F. O’Neil (Ed.), 165-205.
Seliger, H.W., & Shohamy, E. (1989). Second language research methods.
Weir, C., & Robert, J. (1995). Evaluation in ELT.
Wenden, A. (1987). Incorporating learner training in the classroom. In Wenden, A. and Rubin, J. (Eds.). Learner strategies in language learning.
Young, M.Y.C. (1997). A serial ordering of listing comprehension strategies used by Advanced ESL learners in
No comments:
Post a Comment