Cañete Real

1

Marcela Cañete

Felipe A. Real H.

Professor Paula Ross

Applied Linguistics & Communication LET1723-1

25 June 2007

Learning Strategies in Second Language Acquisition: A Research on Oxford’s Taxonomy

Introduction

Inside the vast array of study fields with which Applied Linguistics interacts, Second

Language Acquisition (SLA) has been a phenomenon of the utmost importance on the last thirty

years. Now, a variety of external factors —such as teachers, textbooks or the learner’s group,

plus the determinant factor of the learner characteristics—affect directly the way in which

Second Language (L2) is acquired. These characteristics, which include age, gender, aptitude,

motivation and strategies, can be different in each subject and vary accordingly.

Now, amongst this multitude of L2 learning phenomena, Learning Strategies have proved

to be one of the most difficult—but at the same time—most enlightening and enlivening field of

expertise within SLA framework. This is an easily demonstrable fact, from the numerous amount

of research that has put their attention on the strategies themselves—and more importantly—on

the consequences for language learners derived from their use. Furthermore, all Learning

Strategies’ taxonomies have been strongly argued, because of the implicit learning theories that

they involved—and the possible consequences of one or another’s acceptance.

This can be seen on the debate that followed Oxford’s six category taxonomy and the

appropriate instrument publication, from 1990 to nowadays. As a result, researchers have been

arguing for or against Oxford’s work, through multiple studies and methodologies.

Cañete Real

2

Consequently, this research will try to inquire on this fascinating area inasmuch as the data

obtained on English Letters Major First Year Students allows. In order to do this, Oxford’s

taxonomy and her Strategy Inventory for Language Learning (S.I.L.L.) instrument will be used,

subsequently using the data obtained to perform a regression analysis with Students’ results on

the ALTE 2 Test.

Finally, this research paper is structured as the following: the Introduction that you have

already read, the Theoretical Framework on which this research is based, the Methodology of the

study, the Analysis of the data obtained and the Conclusions and Projections that result form it.

Cañete Real

3

Theoretical Framework

The study of Second Language Acquisition Learning (SLA) is defined by Kramsch in her

article “A New Field of Research: SLA-Applied Linguistics” as “the systematic exploration of

the conditions that make the acquisition of a foreign language possible, both in natural and in

instructional setting.” (1.978). In studying the L2 acquisition phenomenon during the last thirty

years, a great emphasis has been made on studying the differences between the so-called

effective learners —those who perform well in tests or examination— and those whose

performances are not that good. Moreover, Oxford and Hsiao comment the increasing popularity

of one individual-difference variable —L2 Learning Strategies— amongst researchers (Chamot,

Barnhardt, El-Dinary and Robbins, Cohen, Hsiao, MacIntyre and Noels, Oxford and Cohen)

interested in the language learning process (368). Consequently, much scrutiny has been done in

this particular field of expertise, in search for a taxonomy that appropriately reflects the results

obtained through data and furthermore, that helps researchers and teachers to advocate for faster

and better foreign language learning processes.

Nevertheless, SLA scholars do not agree in the definition of L2 Learning Strategies nor in

which taxonomy fits the empirical evidence accordingly. This disagreement is presented by

various authors, such as Bruen, Kramsch, Oxford and Hsiao, Rivers and Tseng et al., in their

own studies theoretical frameworks. However, Oxford six-category allotment (1990) has

outshone other L2 learning theories because it has proved consistent with experimental evidence

(Bruen, Rivers). This ordering includes:

“Cognitive strategies involve identifying, retaining, storing and retrieving words, phrases

and other elements of the second language. Metacognitive strategies, on the other hand, allow

learners to control their own cognition by coordinating the planning, organizing and evaluation

Cañete Real

4

of the learning process. Social strategies include actions taken to interact with others through the

target language while affective strategies serve to regulate emotions, motivation and attitudes.

Memory-related strategies help to commit material to memory and finally compensatory

strategies include all of those that help to make up for gaps in knowledge.”(Bruen, 159) [our

emphasis]

In contrast, whilst this sorting is theoretically arguable, its most noticeable repercussion is

the famous Strategy Inventory for Language Learning (SILL) that is described by Bruen as “one

of the most widely used and comprehensive strategy questionnaires currently available.” (158)

This instrument has been used in various studies —including those that have came to fruition by

Bruen, Rivers— and furthermore, it was demonstrated to be statistically reliable by Hsiao and

Oxford confirmatory factor analysis.

In addition to the abovementioned, one of the more relevant aspects of L2 Learning

Strategies is the construction of learner autonomy. This can be comprehensively defined as: “(a)

willingness to perform a language task with little or no assistance, with flexibility according to

the situation, and with transferability to other contexts; and (b) relevant action, including the use

of appropriate L2 learning strategies for accomplishing the task.” (Oxford and Hsiao, 369) This

consequence has been thoroughly analyzed in Rivers’ study “Autonomy at All Costs: An

Ethnography of Metacognitive Self-Assessment and Self-Management among Experienced

Language Learners” and has been concluded to be related to the metacognitive category of the

learning strategies proposed by Oxford.

In opposition to the previously stated, Wen-Ta Tseng, Zoltán Dörnyei and Norbert

Schmitt have proposed a new approach to study strategic learning. In their study “A New

Approach to Assessing Strategic Learning: The Case of Self-Regulation in Vocabulary

Cañete Real

5

Acquisition” they affirm that “a series of problems [have] weaken the theoretical basis” (78) of

L2 Learning Strategies studies. Amidst these problems, they identify as a one of crucial

importance “the psychometric properties of the assessment instruments used.” (78) For that

reason, they strongly criticized Oxford’s SILL questionnaire because “[its] scale descriptors

indicate frequencies of strategy use” which results in behavioural items that “[cannot lead to]

linear relationship between individual items scores and the total scores.” (83) As shown, the

SILL scores are not cumulative and therefore, cannot be computed into mean scale scores. In

summary, the SILL could possibly lead us to a contradiction with language learning theories; i.e.

that extensive and vary learning strategies are better than few but intensive ones. This conclusion

—that is the theoretical basis for Tseng et al study— is absolutely refutable. First, because the

SILL Data Analysis always correspond to the researcher —as in any investigation—and the

conclusions extracted from it must be carefully considered beforehand. Secondly, because the

fact that an experienced learner has a large number of learning strategies doesn’t necessarily

mean that they are shallow or not intensive and thirdly —and the most important of all—

because all factual evidence in the last fifteen years have proved congruous with Oxford’s

survey, in spite of the fact that educational psychologists have abandoned this research area —

which is another strong argument against SILL proposed by Tseng et al.

In conclusion, as a result of all the experimental evidence presented, this study will

uphold for Oxford’s taxonomy and her SILL questionnaire —a self-respond instrument that

consists of 50 questions related to Oxford’s six-category distribution. All the data gathered will

then be analyzed through a regression that will correlate the 2007 English Language I Students’

results on the ALTE 2 Test, with their answers to the SILL examination for students of English

as a second or foreign language. Finally, that inquiry will allow us to determine the significance

Cañete Real

6

and value of the ß coefficients —factors that statistically give us relevant information— so to

conclude whether the learning strategies are determinant or not in the achievement of better

academic results.

Cañete Real

7

Methodology

SUBJECTS AND THEIR BACKGROUND

16 Chilean students aged between 17 and 19-years-old participated in this research. They

were 14 women ands 2 men, all native speakers of Chilean Spanish. They all have a prior general

knowledge of the English Language, as consequence of their studies in secondary and high

school or what they have learned via mass media, prior attending to university.

They had completed their first semester (consisting of 16 weeks) at the university

studying English at an intermediate level (7 modules per week; i.e. 9 hours and 20 minutes plus 2

modules of English Grammar, i.e., 2 hours and 40 minutes) They also have oral activities, one

module per week of Speaking i.e. hour and 20 minutes. This module consists in conversations

and discussions about relevant current issues. They have also had to go through ALTE 2 Test,

which measures the students’ knowledge of English. The test includes reading comprehension,

grammar and writing skills.

They all have never been informed about learning strategies and in general they have

never heard about them when they answered the questionnaire.

S.I.L.L. INSTRUMENT

The S.I.L.L.—developed by Rebecca Oxford—measures the levels and types of strategic

activity on language learners. It is based on Oxford’s classification of learning strategies into 6

groups, named metacognitive, cognitive, social, affective, memory-related and compensatory. It

consists in 50 questions and was developed for learners of English as L2. The questionnaire

requires the subject to rate on a scale of five steps how true each statement is for them. The

levels are: 1 – Never or almost never true of me, 2 – Usually not true for me, 3 – Somewhat true

Cañete Real

8

of me, 4 – Usually true of me and 5 – Always or almost always true of me. In the survey itself,

Questions 1 to 9 (Part A) concern memory-related strategies, whilst Questions 10 to 23 (Part B)

are related to cognitive strategies. Questions 24 to 29 (Part C) regard compensatory strategies

and Questions 30 to 38 (Part D) pertain to metacognitive strategies. Finally, Questions 39 to 44

(Part E) involve affective strategies and Questions 45 to 50 (Part F) are referred to social

strategies.

PROCEDURE

The students completed the S.I.L.L in week 16 of the semester (June 2007). The

questionnaire was completed during class time, in the first half hour of the first module. They

were told that results would be used for research purposes only. The questionnaire took each

student approximately thirty minutes to finish it. The results of the ALTE 2 Test were published

on University website and are accessible through the “Número de Alumno” that was willingly

provided by students themselves.

Cañete Real

9

Analysis

Thanks to the linear regression analysis developed by SPSS® for Windows® from the

Input—composed by S.I.L.L. questionnaire results and the ALTE 2 Test Results— the following

statistic reality was obtained (all the results are expressed in percentages).

Chart 1: Descriptive Statistics Mean Std. Deviation ALTE 2 Test Results ,7894 ,14704 Memory-Related Strategies

,6075 ,10376

Cognitive Strategies ,7031 ,10867 Compensatory Strategies ,6394 ,11750 Metacognitive Strategies ,7087 ,11690 Affective Strategies ,6481 ,07609 Social Strategies ,7763 ,13460

This chart shows the mean-for both the dependent and the independent variables- and

their respective standard deviations, for n=16. In this sense, the students' mean qualitative

measure is always greater than 60 per cent of achievement, along with a standard deviation that

reveals that this achievement percentage will not fall beyond a 40, including the 95.54

percentage of the cross-section. Now, regarding ALTE 2 Test results, the mean is roughly a 79

per cent whilst standard deviation shows that 95.54 percentage of the cross-section is above 50

per cent of achievement.

Cañete Real

10

Chart 2: Coefficients

Unstandardized

Coefficients Standardized Coefficients

t-statistic

Collinearity Statistic

p-value

Variable Label

Variable Name B Std. Error Beta VIF Sig.

(Constant) 1,436 ,457 3,140 ,012 Memory-Related Strategies

1β -,848 ,710 -,598 -1,194

3,309861 ,263

Cognitive Strategies

2β ,569 ,515 ,421 1,106 1,909337

,298

Compensatory Strategies 3β -,065 ,393 -,052 -,165 1,301264 ,873

Metacognitive Strategies 4β ,030 ,604 ,024 ,050 3,046805 ,961

Affective Strategies 5β

-,469 ,613 -,243 -,764

1,329452 ,464

Social Strategies 6β -,267 ,367 -,245 -,728 1,486799 ,485

a) Dependent Variable: ALTE 2 Test Results

Chart 2 describes regression analysis results. From the coefficients encountered, the

model can be expressed in the following equation

εββββββ −−−+−+−= 654321 267.0469.0030.0065.0569.0848.0436.1y

In this case, the first noticeable characteristic of this study is the correlation between

meaningful variables and the dependent variable. As it can be seen above, memory-related,

affective, social and compensatory strategies have been found to be negatively correlated with

the independent variable. Hence, it can be deducted that it is not a determinant factor to have

learning strategies to obtain better academic results. Also, it is possible to state that a student

with metacognitive or cognitive strategies will achieve a better result in the ALTE examination

that one without these ones, but with one or more of the aforementioned negative variables. This

is directly related to the positive weight of the model's constant

In contrast, the VIF's results within the range of 1 to 5, suggests the existence of

moderate multicollinearity between meaningful variables. This is a sign of the impossibility of

separating one learning strategy form another on the overall effect produced on the learner's

Cañete Real

11

results. As a result, the ß coefficients can be mixed up inasmuch as the adjacent nature of the

boundaries between learning strategies.

Meanwhile, the significance of the model—determined by a t-statistic smaller than

1.96—allows us to say that the model is not significant at a 95 per cent. This is even more clearly

affirmed by the p-value grater than 0.05. In brief words, the meaningful variables-from ß1 to ß6

are not significant.

On the contrary, the constant of the model has a t-statistic equal to 3.140 and a p-value of

0.012. This result indicates that the model is almost entirely explained by the existence of the

constant and therefore, the meaningful variables selected are not sufficient to explain the

dependent variable's behavior.

The constant include in any model has the purpose of explaining the effect produced by

other meaningful variables not included in the model. In this case, we could infer that the

constant encompasses aspects such as students' aptitude, previous experience on the English

Language, Motivation and other learner characteristics, which could possibly explain better the

dependent variable than the learning strategies, chosen to be inquired on this research. This can

be seen through the R-square parameter—that measures the significance of the model as a

whole—and that vary between 0 and 1. The closest this value gets to 0, the less relationship

between dependant and meaningful variables exist. Now, since the increase on the amount of

meaningful variables affects this measurement, it should be considered the adjusted value for this

parameter, which in this case is negative. In conclusion, it can be affirmed that there is no true,

statistic relationship between the dependant variable—ALTE 2 Test Results—and the

meaningful variables—learning strategies according to Oxford’s S.I.L.L. instrument— present

on this research.

Cañete Real

12

Table 3: Model Summary

a) Predictors: (Constant), Social Strategies, Affective Strategies, Memory-Related Strategies, Compensatory Strategies, Cognitive Strategies, Metacognitive Strategies b) Dependent Variable: ALTE 2 Test Results

Model R R

Square

Adjusted R

Square

Std. Error of the

Estimate

Change Statistics

Durbin-Watson

R Square Change

F Change df1 df2

Sig. F Change

1 ,564(a) ,318 -,137 ,15679 ,318 ,699 6 9 ,658 ,488

Cañete Real

13

Conclusions

As a result of the analysis previously developed, it can be concluded that:

▪ Oxford’s S.I.L.L. instrument does not reflect the reality as well as it was thought. Indeed,

the data—and the analysis made from it— show that Dörnyei et. al. critics were well-

based. This is especially clear from the negative relationships that relate 4 of the 6

Oxford’s learning strategies categories with the academic measurement.

▪ Considering that, it is an obvious inference that Oxford’s taxonomy of L2 Learning

Strategies is not as accurate as it was supposed to be. To illustrate this, it is only

necessary to analyze the significance of the experiment’s constant. In other words, that

the variables not considered in this experiment—and that are supposed to be in a ceteris

paribus state— were more determinant in the academic results that the variables studied.

▪ Nonetheless, it is interesting to notice that the only 2 variables that were positively

related to the academic results are the ones’ which have been acknowledged as the most

important of Oxford’s allotment. These are cognitive and metacognitive strategies. Thus,

we can conclude that these variables have still proved to be important in the SLA area.

▪ Finally, it is highlight that these outcomes lead to advocate for a new approach—as it was

proposed by Dörnyei et. al.—to develop the language learning field of expertise.

▪ In brief, it is nevertheless considerable to remember that this research can have suffered

from many structural problem; i.e. that the data obtained can have been not properly

isolated, producing therefore a non-realistic study and conclusions.

Cañete Real

14

Projections

From the conclusions obtained in this research, we can project that:

▪ A lot of research must be done in SLA, especially studies that focus on Native

Spanish speakers whom are learning English as a L2. Besides that, this field of

expertise must be considered as a foundation for English language classes, so to help

learners to develop a better and faster learning processes.

▪ A broader spectrum study could be done with English Language I students, to relate

their marks on the course with these types of questionnaires, during a larger period of

time and accompanied by personal surveys that allow the researchers to avoid the

intromission of non-desirable variables in their studies.

▪ More research could be done on the “New Approaches” to language learning, such as

the one proposed by Dörnyei et. al., to develop comparative studies afterwards

between New and Old Theories, so to conclude on guidelines that could lead

language learning research and orientation to learners in the future.

▪ In summary, it is important to advocate for more research on L2 learning strategies,

insofar as they can improve learners’ experiences and language learning processes.

Nowadays, this issue is not less considerable, as a result of the burgeoning interest on

learning foreign languages in our country.

Cañete Real

15

Works Cited

Bruen, Jennifer. “The Parallel Development of Oral Proficiency and Use of Language Learning

Strategies” Die Unterrichtspraxis / Teaching German 34, 2. (158-168) 7 June 2007

<http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0042-

062X%28200123%2934%3A2%3C158%3ATPDOOP%3E2.0.CO%3B2-1>

Dörnyei Zoltán, Schmitt Norbert and Tseng Wen-Ta. “A New Approach to Assessing Strategic

Learning: The Case of Self-Regulation in Vocabulary Acquisition” Applied Linguistics.

27, 1 (78-102) 7 June 2007

<http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?RQT=306&TS=1080583443&DBId=4617&cfc=1>

Hsiao, Tsung-Yuan and Oxford, Rebecca L. “Comparing Theories of Language Learning

Strategies: A Confirmatory Factor Analysis” The Modern Language Journal 86, 3 (368-

383) 7 June 2007 <http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0026-

7902%28200223%2986%3A3%3C368%3ACTOLLS%3E2.0.CO%3B2-C>

Kramsch, Claire. “A New Field of Research: SLA-Applied Linguistics.” PMLA 115, 7. Special

Millennium Issue. Dec., 2000. (1978-1980) 7 June 2007

<http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0030-

8129%28200012%29115%3A7%3C1978%3AANFORS%3E2.0.CO%3B2-M>

Rivers, William P. “Autonomy at All Costs: An Ethnography of Metacognitive Self-Assessment

and Self-Management among Experienced Language Learners.” The Modern Language

Journal 85, 2 (279-290) 7 June 2007 <http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0026-

7902%28200122%2985%3A2%3C279%3AAAACAE%3E2.0.CO%3B2-M>